Google makes money on ads. The ads are targeted based on what you're doing with their services. I don't see how saying they "watch over" your activities is disingenuous at all. Invoking "Big Brother" is a little bit over the top, but they are indeed watching what you and I are doing, it's just that they're using that information to make money, not to control our minds or keep us from revolting against a corrupt government.

The question is whether you think the "watching over" is pernicious or benign. Their "Don't Be Evil" slogan has been believable so far, but we're in trouble if the evil bit ever gets flipped, simply based on how much of our digital lives we're all handing over to them.

Re: Flash, the simple fact is that Apple is very anti-Flash, whereas Google is happy to work with Flash for now. There's a flash plugin for the Chrome browser, so it's logical to think one would end up in Chrome OS. Is it 100% guaranteed? No, but again, this was just a "what if" scenario, so you make some assumptions.

Re: pricing, she didn't say it was just Google making the OS that would make it competitive price-wise, she also cited a rumored connection to HTC, which certainly has the wherewithal to develop an affordable device. It's just a rumored connection, but again, this is all just a "what if" hypothetical exercise.

Anyway, the real flaw in your premise is the idea that the New York Times is somehow miles above your average internet blog. The bloom came off that rose a long time ago -- Judy Miller, Jayson Blair, William Kristol are just the higher profile examples.