China and Google collide, and the AP hacks up a clear situation to meet some agenda of bashing China over human rights, rather than being outraged and intense over what arguably has clear indicia of sophisticated industrial espionage.
Whacking the US economy is bigger than protester folks in China being spied upon.
Read the AP feed that Strib carried; this link.
Read the Google explanation of what caused them alert and concern; this link.
Why in the world is there a disconnect between clean, direct reporting, and editorializing in the reporting? This suggests a head or two should roll at AP, unless that is the editorial policy, slanting news, from the top down.
There are a ton of other items on the issue, Time's reporting (this link) being one of the first Google return hits for a search = david drummond google blog china
The AP item did mention the Drummond info online, but did not even provide a link! I had to recognize where to search by reading between the lines, and formulate the search, and that's not providing handy unbiased news by anyone's measure.
That is downright awful performance of journalism, and I say that without ever having taken a single course in the discipline. It is that apparent to any Joe on the street, myself included.
Instead of dissecting the story, they ax murdered it.
_______UPDATE_______
Okay, they seized on part of a far, far, far bigger story, and it might be a competence issue rather than one of bias. Cut AP that slack. For a good flavor, read a few items from the first page of hits, this link.
Or Bing it.
This link, for a Bing search = Google.
Bing returns on Google news and situations are sometimes quite amusing in things emphasized. This example, Bing search = google business model.
Compare a Bing search = microsoft business model
Talk about slanting things --- MS does not tell you about it as much as sucking you into it at the start of the hit list. Unlike how it stacks the top re the competitor.
