If you repeat something often enough, people start to think it's true. That, more than any other reason, is why people seem to believe that Google follows its famous, unofficial motto: "Don't be Evil." As a branding exercise, the slogan was sheer genius.

Evil genius, that is.

When we talk about Google, we're talking about a company that controls much of the Internet and increasing chunk of the advertising business, as well as a staggering amount of data. Most of its information comes from Internet searches that don't have names attached, but could be guessed without much trouble. The company is extending its reach to street-level photographs, medical records, and genetic information. In a few years, Google may know more about you than you can remember yourself.

These days, however, Big Brother can't even take care of his younger siblings. This weekend New York Times columnist Joe Nocera wrote about what I'll christen "Kindergate" – the controversy over Google's changing childcare policy. On the surface, it seems like a typhoon in a teapot – a fight between members of the business elite over childcare perks in a country where many enjoy no such benefits. Dig in, though, and it's plenty disturbing.

As Nocera tells it, a Google employee named Susan Wojcicki decided to change Google's daycare system. At first, the "Kinderplex" was run by Childrens' Creative Learning Centers, but Wojcicki wanted to adapt Reggio Emilia – which sounds like a type of trendy cheese but is apparently a type of trendy education movement. You really have to read Nocera's piece for the details, but here's the upshot: "Parents who had been paying $1,425 a month for infant care would see their costs rise to nearly $2,500." (Usual disclosure: I write for the Times.)

From everything we've read about Google, the "best company to work for," according to Fortune, this doesn't sound realistic. But wait – it's worse. At a meeting to discuss the issue, company co-founder Sergey Brin said he was tired of employees who felt entitled to perks like "bottled water and M&Ms." This from a man who has a private jet. Journalistic convention compels me to note that a Google spokesperson denies that Brin said this, but I don't believe that for a minute.

What made this galling to many employees is that Wojcicki is Brin's sister-in-law, the person who rented the garage Google started in to him and co-founder Larry Page and the company's current vice-president for product management. Since Google's products do not (yet) include child care, one must assume that Wojcicki derives much of her authority from personal connections. At a public company, that's not good. At one of the world's biggest public companies, it's a minor scandal.

Google spokespeople and other writers have questioned whether this very minor scandal is worth an article in the Times, much less one that ran on the front page. I'd ask another question. After seeing how Google handles its internal affairs – which seem to be run partly by the whim of the co-founder's sister-in-law – how much do you trust them to handle your medical records?