Gizmodo 
Enter your username and password.
Tip your editors:
tips@gizmodo.com
Editorial Director:
Brian Lam | Email | Twitter
Editor:
Jason Chen
Email | AIM | Twitter
Features Editor:
Wilson Rothman
Email | Twitter
Senior Contributing Editors:
Jesus Diaz
Email | AIM | Twitter
Mark Wilson, Reviews
Email | AIM | Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Matt Buchanan
Email | AIM | Twitter
Adam Frucci
Email | Twitter
Sean Fallon
Email | Twitter
Jack Loftus
Email | Twitter
John Herrman
Email | Twitter
Dan Nosowitz
Email
Chris Mascari
Email
Danny Allen
Email | Twitter
Rosa Golijan
Email | Twitter
Chris Jacob
Email
Columnist:
Brendan I. Koerner
Interns:
Don Nguyen
Email
Kyle VanHemert
Email
Comment Intern:
Nick Ellenoff | Email
Comment Account Questions:
Comments@gizmodo.com
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
11/24/09
11/24/09
Never mind the fact that if this happens at all it's going to be mostly Rupert fucking Murdochs fault.
You deny it but this IS typical Microsoft bashing. You can't claim otherwise when you're calling Microsoft evil every other paragraph and in the title no less. This could have been an article on JUST the dangers of splitting searches if this does all go down. Instead it's that with a minefield of corporate bis, based on little more than rumour, thrown in.
11/23/09
Shocking. I believe you've just described a characteristic of capitalism's reality.
11/24/09
Hahaha, yeah, I was going to comment on that.
As if there is a CEO who would think "critical acclaim" is better than sales! As if Ballmer and Microsoft were the only ones...
Frankly, this article is a bit of overreacting. It lacks quality, but it shoots audience up. Ooops.
11/24/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
Destroy search engines, that will really make your company popular with the youth.
11/23/09
11/23/09
What if it had been, Jeff Zucker, president and CEO of the *always* fair and balanced MSNBC, saying that he was pulling all NBC content off google?
Would you start using Bing? Or is it just about getting your news from people with the same opinion as you?
11/23/09
The tone of the post already pointed out the idiocy of the poster.
not having easy access to all data or all points of views just leads more towards state media control.
even the reporters at the other major network news agencies figured this out when the white house put out their denial to allow fox news into a recent news conference.
They were able to easily make the leap to "the white house blocks them out now, and then later they block us out when we disagree with them".
Thus the reason they responded with their "if they aren't allowed, we won't be there either" retort and called the bluff of the white house.
11/23/09
11/24/09
Now, if you please, cease and desist the name-calling.
11/24/09
11/24/09
This is coming from someone who personally hates biased news, but I still want the ability to see what both sides are saying. If I'm going to get bias, I at least want both (or in some cases, 3 or 4) sides of it. Otherwise, you're only getting news that panders to your preconceived notions, that fulfills your inherent beliefs. You'll never challenge your own thoughts and will never grow or have the ability to hear a new argument that might actually be better than your current ideas or thoughts. (Think people who ONLY watch FoxNews, or ONLY go to PETA meetings.)
11/24/09
#tips
11/24/09
You hit the nail on the head when you said that until robots produce the news, it will always be biased. Do you think that CNN's website, BBC's podcasts, and NBC are unbiased enough for you? Because I've got news for you - they're biased. They all are. It's the ability to see ALL SIDES that allows us, as humans with working, rational brains to discern where the bias is, and which parts to avoid.
My point is that we are all inherently biased, but at least I am willing to admit it. You saying that you aren't is just hypocritical. Especially because you resort to petty name calling when someone brings up a legitimate point.
On a slight tangent - have you ever considered that due to their inherent bias, left leaning media may ignore a story that right leaning media would pick up? You may actually not read or hear about news that could potentially be important. It may be riddled with bias, but being that you are able to discern where the bias is, you'd be able to glean new information from this right leaning news source that you wouldn't have been able to from your left leaning news stations. Just something to think about. This all comes from someone who thinks that Fox News is an abomination of journalism - but yet still does hold a necessary place in our society - to challenge the views of those who assume they are always right. Because guess what, sometimes they aren't.
#tips
11/25/09
"I'm sorry, I must be mistaken. Your not actually suggesting Fox News ... is news?"
Yes. You are severely mistaken. Nowhere in my post did I suggest fox news is news. Stellar reading comprehension you have there.
That was an awesome reply though. No, really. It was spectacular.
I don't watch fox news. I hate fox news. I was merely pointing out your hypocrisy, which you verified quite nicely.
As I suspected, you only prefer to get the news from outlets that give you the news you want to hear. You think NBC and CNN are any different than fox news? They aren't, but they cater to your political opinion, obviously.
But you must really enjoy living life inside an echo chamber. Don't cha?
#tips
11/23/09
I typed in "tear" for a picture, and I got a gallery of "vaginal tearing during childbirth"
11/23/09
11/23/09
@Xagest: I don't know what you're looking at, I only found tears, tears in joints, and one sad, disapproving cat.
[www.bing.com]
11/23/09
I've already submitted my request for Google to pay me to search my comments on Giz.
Anyone have Ballmer's email?
I'm figuring nothing short of a bidding war between MS and Google can truly serve the public interest and its insatiable demand to search my ruminations on news about gadgets.
11/23/09
11/23/09
If you have valuable content, why the fuck would you want to let Google/MSFT make money off of it via Search/Ad Revenue?
Also, [www.bing-vs-google.com] and now you only have to type it in once.
11/23/09
11/23/09
That's the point. If you have content that people want, you don't *need* Google. I don't need to Bing/Google search to find poorly written tech op/ed pieces, I can just go to Giz directly and get what I want.
Also, if something better than Google came out, people would switch to it. No one really cares what search engine they use, they just care that the results are accurate.
#tips
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
It's not "green" to artificially generate the necessity for more server farms. That's the PC way of saying, "Way to be a dick and waste our time and money, jerks."
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09
11/23/09