Mike, your critique is certainly valid and I am glad you raise it. There is no excuse in not citing the use of CKAN etc. in hosting/using (open) datasets by government agencies and users. I think what was slipped in was a desire to say something to the effect that "the other" are also playing up the open government data hubba hubba with their products and services; we failed to state it in a proper context.

I also wish I can say more in the article about the process from which the data is produced and released. If the process is not open and transparent, ones cannot be sure if there exist systematic biases or "bugs" in the data generation process, and for them to be fixed. The parallel to open source in open data indeed is manyfold.