why it caused some confusion

why it caused some confusion For a while this weekend, it looked like Google pandora bracelethad chosen to insert itself in the middle of the national debate over healthcare and take on controversial filmmaker Michael Moore.

In an official corporate blog, a Google employee criticized Mr. Moore’s movie, Sicko, as one-sided: “Moore’s film portrays the industry as money and marketing driven, and fails to show healthcare’s interest in patient well-being and care,” wrote Lauren Turner, a Health Account Planner at Google.

Ms. Turner went on to suggest that Google could help much-maligned health care companies to “Get the Facts” out. How? By buying ads on Google, of course.

By Sunday, after her post raised some eyebrows in the blogosphere, Ms. Turner clarified that the opinion about Sicko was hers, not Google’s. “Some readers thought the opinion I expressed about the movie Sicko was actually Google’s opinion,” she wrote. “It’s easy to understand why it might have seemed that way, because after all, this is a corporate blog. So that was my mistake — I understand why it caused some confusion.”

A Google spokesman told me much the same.

But Ms. Turner also said that she stood by her earlier comments that Google stood ready to help anyone , whether the healthcare industry or Mr. Moore’s himself: “Whether the healthcare industry wants to rebut charges in Mr. Moore’s movie, or whether Mr. Moore wants to challenge the healthcare industry, advertising is a very democratic and effective way to participate in a public dialogue,” she wrote.

That said, it’s not clear that Mr. Moore needs to spend money on Google to get his message out.