londrum - 8:07 pm on Jul 15, 2010 (gmt 0) [edited by: londrum at 8:16 pm (utc) on Jul 15, 2010]
I wonder how the NYT would react to an editorial by Google suggesting that the US Government review editorial decisions made at the Times on what not to print... just saying.
thats a bit different because the NYT can't ruin a business, unless they've done something to bring about their own downfall. if they do a business down for no reason, through libel, or reporting something that's not true, then there are laws in place to combat it.
that's the difference. google have got the power to send a business to the wall and there's no come back. short of sending them a big bunch of flowers and hoping for the best, there's nothing you can do.
remember that google already picks on sites for no good reason. if you sell adverts on your site, eg text links, which is a perfectly legitimate business practice and not at all illegal, then google will boot you back to minus one billion in the serps. they can ruin your business just because you tried to make a few perfectly legitimate pennies.
and look at all the AdWords people who have been complaining in that other thread. They are getting the boot, for what? who knows. Some of those people control AdWords accounts for an actual living, but none of them can say exactly why their livlihoods have gone up in smoke.
if a company sacks you for no reason, you can take them to court. but if google dumps you for no reason, there is practically nothing you can do.
[edited by: londrum at 8:16 pm (utc) on Jul 15, 2010]