Forrester Research analyst Charlene Li now claims that she was the source of the New York Times scoop about Google's OpenSocial program, something we alluded to in a post yesterday about a quote from Li being scrubbed from the Times story. So, why did she say she spilled the beans? Turns out that Li got the embargo dates wrong, thinking that the information could be distributed as of last Friday, instead of this one. As for why the quote was pulled? The Times doesn't comment on its reporting or sources, but it was more likely cut for space in an edit than for any nefarious reason. If you've read one analyst quote, you've read 'em all. And given the number of other sources the Times plausibly could have had on this story, one wonders if Li isn't giving herself entirely too much credit.

Last night, when Brad Stone and Miguel Helft got the scoop about Google's OpenSocial program, they included a quote from Forrester Research analyst Charlene Li. You can still find the quote using Google's search engine, but it's gone from the text of the story, and we can't find any cached version. Why? Perhaps it was cut for space in the final print version. That strikes me as curious, since space considerations don't apply to the Web, where the full version could have easily remained. More intriguing is the whispers that an unduly loquacious Li might have played a role in the New York Times getting the scoop. We're stumped. Anyone have an answer?