If they smell Googles blood in the water they will be after them just like Murdoch does the BBC.

Alternately, perhaps the media don't report this because it's simply too complicated or nuanced for a sound bite, or irrelevant to their audience. Who wants to hear some of the most highly-compensated people in America complain about their employers conspiring to suppress their already unimaginable-for-many salaries?

industry media is usually fawning

- why pay a writer to write a whole article when you can just reprint a press release with slight edits?

- they live in fear of "losing access" because they have nothing else to cover

- kool-aid-drinking sells

E.g., can you imagine TechCrunch announcing a new startup and then criticizing its concept? it would make startups would think twice about giving them any releases, writers would be able to produce less content, no kool aid.

outsider media, on the other hand, can land on the other end of the pendulum of being overly cynical, paranoid, underinformed etc.

Which is absurd because Eric continues to collect huge compensation packages from Google "for contributing to the company's success".

How could they not know? While Mr Schmidt was CEO, it was a three way decision makin process as I recall. I'm of the opinion that something this big, with such large long term consequences, would surely have been discussed among equal decision making partners.