Canon's image stabilization technology (in the lens) is not a cheap marketing ploy. Optical stabilization (in the lens) actually produces better results than in-camera stabilization. That is why it is used on Canon's more expensive cameras. Nikon also uses lens based optical stabilization on its DSLR cameras, so this decision is not unique to Canon. Sony is the only DSLR maker that I know of which uses in-camera stabilization.
I am a little confused about the cnet camera chooser and how cnet lists specifications. I went through the filter and was looking at some Cannon digital Rebel cameras (as I liked the quality of the sample shots). These models (and other brands) were listed as having optical image stabilization via the filter; however, as I read through the lengthly camera reviews they instead said that the cameras DOES NOT have built-in image stabilization, but instead this is provided only by attaching a lens with such technology.
The filters need to be updated to show image stabilization in camera vs in the lens:
1. There is important technical debate over which is better thus a user should not have to need to read through all the lengthly reviews if they do not want in lens only camera. Thats frankly a lot of money to pay for a camera to not have this.
2. Cameras with lens only stabilization will cost you more money as the lenses cost more. I regard this a cheap marketing ploy whereas they give you a technically inferior camera in order to they sell you more expensive lenses. I am seriously doubting Cannon now over this point.