Want CNET to notify you of price drops and the latest stories?
No, thank you Accept
X
Apple's Mixed Reality HeadsetRemote Working in ParadiseBest Mineral SunscreensBest Solar CompaniesSmart Plugs on SaleMeal Subscription vs. TakeoutBest Satellite Internet ProvidersCurrent Mortgage Rates

Google strikes Sicko in ploy for pharmie funds

In a recent post for the Google Health Advertising Blog, a corporate blogger decided to wail on Michael Moore's new film despite the fact that Google would probably rather not make enemies out of the filmmaker whose made it his life mission to expose corp

Josh Wolf first became interested in the power of the press after writing and distributing a screed against his high school's new dress code. Within a short time, the new dress code was abandoned, and ever since then he's been getting his hands dirty deconstructing the media every step of the way. Wolf recently became the longest-incarcerated journalist for contempt of court in U.S. history after he spent 226 days in federal prison for his refusal to cooperate. In Media sphere, Josh shares his daily insights on the developing information landscape and examines how various corporate and governmental actions effect the free press both in the United States and abroad.
See full bio
2 min read
Lauren Turner is a blogger. Unlike many bloggers out there, she does not blog for herself, she blogs for her employer. As a writer for the Google Health Advertising Blog, Ms. Turner decided to make a post about her reaction to Michael Moore's latest film Sicko. In her recent post, Does negative press make you Sicko, Turner criticizes the new film arguing that, "Moore attacks health insurers, health providers, and pharmaceutical companies by connecting them to isolated and emotional stories of the system at its worst. Moore's film portrays the industry as money and marketing driven, and fails to show healthcare's interest in patient well-being and care." Given what I know about Moore's approach to film making, I'm inclined to think that this is somewhat on point, but I've yet to check out the film, and I suspect Turner hasn't either.

It's true that Michael Moore uses specific examples to paint a broader picture, and it's true that he only includes evidence that supports his thesis, but these were the exact instructions given to me by my high school English teacher when I was taught how to write an essay. Turner, being the good corporate blogger goes on to explain how Google advertising can help these poor little health insurance companies "get the facts" out and better manage their reputations against the publics perception that these companies value profits over patients.

Of course, once the trackbacks began to pile up Google and/or Turner went into damage control mode and on July 1 she posted a clarification citing where Google's opinion ends and hers begins. In the post Turner suggests that, "advertising is a very democratic and effective way to participate in a public dialogue," and explains that this viewpoint is not her opinion but that of Google's. Of course, advertising is anything but democratic, but that is my opinion; not Googles, not Cnet's and certainly not the healthcare industries as they drop dollar after dollar to combat the growing rage that Moore's latest documentary continues to fuel.