Whatever the intention, it's still a very biased perspective - the fact that the bias is so subtle is what makes it even worse.
There's nothing to accuse - nobody's doing anything illegal or even unethical. A more appropriate line would be "[BC] has previously succeeded in hiring talent away from Google[0]", etc. "Accused" is the objectionable word - you generally don't accuse someone of something positive or commonplace.
It's similar to the effect when newspapers have headlines on how "Snowden's actions" have caused people to be more suspicious of the government. (His actions aren't the reason people are suspicious; they're just the reason people know about the facts that are what really make them suspicious)
[0] or, if they want to keep the word "poach" since the pun is part of the story, "[BC] has previously succeeded in poaching talent away from Google", etc.
There's nothing to accuse - nobody's doing anything illegal or even unethical. A more appropriate line would be "[BC] has previously succeeded in hiring talent away from Google[0]", etc. "Accused" is the objectionable word - you generally don't accuse someone of something positive or commonplace.
It's similar to the effect when newspapers have headlines on how "Snowden's actions" have caused people to be more suspicious of the government. (His actions aren't the reason people are suspicious; they're just the reason people know about the facts that are what really make them suspicious)
[0] or, if they want to keep the word "poach" since the pun is part of the story, "[BC] has previously succeeded in poaching talent away from Google", etc.