I wanted to quickly mention Loren Feldman announcing he'll be writing and (to a limited extent) doing videos for CNet. 

Here's the link and the video...

First, I think this is great.  I've always been a fan of his and he gave me some attention a while back which did a lot for this blog so I couldn't be happier to see him succeed.  But what I wanted to talk about is the fact that I think people commenting on this are missing the point. 

I don't think this is about "the puppets" so much...

Look, I'm sure CNet wants to cash in on the puppet action too but I think the bigger point here is the blog.  There's a lot of ridiculousness in the blogosphere.  Topics like "who own comments" and "the unfairness of a 500 friend limit" are, for lack of a better term, stupid. 

But no one says that.  The A-List is uniform in this ridiculousness and I think a normal reader can go a little stir crazy.  Those normal people want someone who will voice that frustration.  Someone who will say "this is stupid!" and be heard. 

Loren Feldman does that and I think it resonates with a lot of people.

In fact, that's really what's at the root of the puppets.  Sure its funny watching him take Shel Israel or Dave Winer to task but the bigger point behind the videos is the ridiculousness of this Web 2.0 world and the commentators that it has spawned. 

If CNet can effectively take Loren's existing upward trajectory and put some resources behind it they can turn him into the definitive voice of this "silent majority" and make themselves the place to find him.  That, more than anything, is what CNet needs to be focusing on.  Its not enough to just have random voices out there anymore.  If they want to succeed they need to start collecting the definitive voices in the industry.

People who aren't just repeating what everyone else is saying.

Very few online relationships have provided me with as much entertainment as the one between CNet reporter Elinor Mills and Google CEO Eric Schmidt. 

It all began a couple years ago when Ms. Mills wrote an article detailing how Google can be used to call up a bunch of private information about individuals.  She used Schmidt as her example pulling up several facts that he evidently didn't' want public.

Schmidt in turn issued an edict to all Google employees forbidding them from talking to any CNet reporters for one year as retribution for the article.  Schmidt, facing public outcry, was rightly forced to back down.

Fast forward to present day where Ms. Mills was offered a 1-on-1 interview with Schmidt if she would be willing to fly across country to get it.  She complied only to find Schmidt wasn't willing to answer any questions that were not about Google Health (which Schmidt had just announced).  You can read Ms. Mill's account of the encounter here and her Boss Dan Farber's commentary here. 

Normally I don't comment on this sort of thing but it was such a great follow up to my previous post on Microsoft vs. Google that I had to post.  Does blacklisting reporters and dodging questions seem like a company that's "doing no evil"?  Do you think Bill Gates or Steve Ballmer would ever dream of doing the same thing?  Maybe a decade ago but not now. 

Google is, more and more, looking like Microsoft of old and while Mr. Schmidt's interactions with CNet might be amusing they also show a disturbing pattern.