Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Jan 2012 21:11 UTC, submitted by bowkota
Permalink for comment 503879
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 22:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 15:53 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 22:43 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 21:50 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:15 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/19/13 23:11 UTC, submitted by Drumhellar
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 7:37 UTC
Linked by fran on 05/18/13 1:38 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2006-08-18
The Title of the news itself is pure hypocrisis, to attract attention, to increase clicks, to increase revenue. There you have it.
What a company *must* do when one of its agent does misconduct ?
1) Acknowledge the incidence, and distance from it
2) Search and find evidence and responsible(s)
3) Punish responsible(s)
In both incidents, all these criteria were met. That matters **a lot**, it's not a "mere detail", and should be entirely given to the credit of Google, to the point of changing the misleading title. Otherwise, there will be no difference with another company which refutes the event, hide and destroy evidences, and protect the culprits.
If a company cannot distance itself from the misconduct of some of its (undeserved) members, then a blog should be made responsible of any comment published in its pages, even if it distances itself from it, even if the comment is published during a short while and removed afterwards, No way, the blog is guilty forever for the misconduct of any temporary affiliate member. And as a consequence, the entire blog should be brought down.
I'm sure this example will talk more to the editor.