walkman - 5:47 pm on Sep 25, 2011 (gmt 0)
I think having Schmidt is rather misguided. He was then, Page is now. The assault on organic search started with that new CEO.
Is Cutts part of the hearings? He should be. The reason? The algo is what influences everything. Asking a CEO about an algo?
That's the whole point for Google. Pass it with "I am not sure, but I doubt it..." but this is just the beginning. The Senate has been unto Google since 2007 when they announced the DblClick buyout.
Either way, Google is speeding up, either to (as gsmd said) change 10 so they'll have to reverse 8 after negotiations, make as much as possible knowing they'll hit a wall or a combo. They also need the money since they have declared war on everyone, from content owners, to At&T, handset makers, Apple, MS, advertisers (that are afraid to talk publicly), us, Oracle etc. Those of us, caught in the middle will have a bad 1-2-3 years. The senate committee has no power, and even if a law is passed it can be challenged in court after court.
Cutts is now mostly defending everything Google, from adwords to Appspot to deflecting any bad thing from the Google brand. Whatever title he had once, probably doesn't matter now. But I doubt they are eager to talk under oath about the algo. If the right questions are asked they could very well be screwed [content.usatoday.com...] and Google does not have the fanboys it once had. Their jig is up.