Google Whistleblower Foundem Bullied by Google Apologists

The latest whistleblower of Google anti-competitive behavior, Adam Raff of Foundem, wrote an excellent op-ed in the New York Times last week that should not be missed, and that explained why Google is a much greater threat to an open Internet than anyone else. (To learn more about Google's monopoly bullying of Foundem, see "Foundem's Google Story" at www.searchneutrality.org.) 

What's also troublesome here is the reflexive bullying and impugning of the credibility of the victim by Google apologists, that apparently assume that if Google did something to Foundem, Foundem must have deserved it... because the Google apologists assume Google's search algorithm and business can do no wrong (even though they, nor any independent third party, has ever reviewed or audited Google's search algorithm or quality score for neutrality or anti-competitiveness.)

• Mr. Masnick of Techdirt, in his defense of Google, not only goes after the apparent victim, but also maligns the New York Times for their audacity to give an apparent victim and Google whistleblower the support of free speech on the New York Times opinion page. 
  • "...an absolutely ridiculous op-ed in the NY Times from a guy who runs a price comparison search engine that offered little of value and reasonably was punished by Google for it."
• Mr. Kedrosky of Infectious Greed says in his post: "NYT runs quack, self-serving, anti-Google op-ed": 
  • "The NY Times has run a silly editorial by a self-interested search company founder who would like his site to get more traffic, but hasn't gone to the trouble of building something useful. The only scandal I see here is that apparently NY Times OpEds over the holidays are vetted by malnourished monkeys."  
• Chris Lake of Econsultancy said in his 8-18-09 post:
  • "Google is remarkably good at determining which sites deserve attention, and which ones don’t."
    • (To Mr. Lake's credit he does not even try to defend Google's claim that its search results are neutral and Google does not pick winners and losers.)
  • "Foundem is pretty much an aggregator of third party content, with very little unique content of its own. This, as far as Google is concerned, is not an attractive proposition."
    • (I guess only Google should be allowed to aggregate third party content and rank their own content above all competitors...) 

The disturbing takeaways here are -- How dare anyone:

• Exercise their free speech to speak out against Google!
• Have opinions and views different from Google's!
• Be concerned about competition or the free flow of information!

Appparently, Google knows best... always...