or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jobs asks author: "Are you a nut case?"
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Jobs asks author: "Are you a nut case?" - Page 2

post #41 of 103
Nope, no sir, no talk about jelly beans in here!
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
My brain is hung like a HORSE!
Reply
post #42 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Thousands of books, government courses in high school, law schools, etc.

It's different from the word "censure" which means a judgement of condemnation, which can be from anyone.

Censorship is a term that is used incorrectly many times. That doesn't give those incorrect uses authority.

Editorial judgments are made all the time. Appropriateness is the job of the editor. What is published in one journal may not be fit for another. Editorial judgements are not the same as censorship.

However, if the government says that no journal may publish it, that's censorship.

An example would be those seven words not allowed on TV (though they are now coming out after all). The network "censors" were there to make sure they, and other matters, didn't appear. But it was understood that the government would have legislated its own rules had the networks not acceded to their expectations. That's censorship. You can see what the networks are doing since the government has loosened up.


Yes I know what it means mate, but you are defining it at purely as an act of government. This simply isn't true; while governments are most often the censor by the nature of their position it is possible for any body or individual in a position of power to censor information.
post #43 of 103
Steve Jobs is president and CEO of 2 companies which belong to the top 100 companies listed on the NASDQ stock exchange.

Quite naturally, there is interest in his life and upbringing. The fact that he was adopted makes his life even more fascinating. And his success more rewarding.

In any biography of Steve Jobs, there can be a mention of his adoptive parents who raised him and gave him values. But has Steve Jobs ever met his biological father? I doubt it and don't believe they keep in touch. Therefore, the biological father of Steve Jobs is of little, if any, interest to anyone.

Why would I want to read about some unknown character who never played any significant role in Steve Jobs life? And pay to read about it?

To quote William Shatner on the fans who obsess about his character of Captain Kirk "Get a life!"


Pierre
Gatineau, Quebec
post #44 of 103
An article by Lisa Brennen-Jobs (namesake for the Lisa computer, Jobs first daughter):

http://www.theharvardadvocate.com/archives/driving.html

"Like me, Jane was born out of wedlock, grew up with a single mother, moved 13 times, and began the slow process of getting to know her father later in life."

The only thing that bothered me about Jobs various biographys was the suggestion that he had abandoned his daughter to live in poverty as a child - but it looks like it worked out in the end.

BTW - she verifies the biological grandfather: "Jane di Natali, her full name in the novel, sounds very much like "Jondali," my Arabic grandfather's name which, by a twist of fate, I didn't inherit."
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #45 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
An article by Lisa Brennen-Jobs (namesake for the Lisa computer, Jobs first daughter):

http://www.theharvardadvocate.com/archives/driving.html

"Like me, Jane was born out of wedlock, grew up with a single mother, moved 13 times, and began the slow process of getting to know her father later in life."

The only thing that bothered me about Jobs various biographys was the suggestion that he had abandoned his daughter to live in poverty as a child - but it looks like it worked out in the end.

BTW - she verifies the biological grandfather: "Jane di Natali, her full name in the novel, sounds very much like "Jondali," my Arabic grandfather's name which, by a twist of fate, I didn't inherit."

It doesn't really sound like that in her writing. It seems as though her mother was as much a part of the decision, and that she got to know him fairly young.
post #46 of 103
I agree, the guy is a nutcase, there's no news here, and it's not censorship to say that AppleInsider shouldn't have posted this "story" in the first place. What the hell difference does it make to anybody who Jobs's natural parents are? What new computer they're making, that's interesting. Butt out of the guy's private life.
post #47 of 103
I should clarify my original post. I was not saying that AI shouldn't have posted the "story" -- though it's a bit questionable -- but instead that objective "journalists" don't use the wording as italicized in the quotes.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #48 of 103


So much to say, so little time to say it (i. e. the attention span of the average person (nee AI reader) is like what, 10 seconds)!

Censorship, BIG subject, many forms (i. e. state, private, individual (you're still listening aren't you?)). This is definitely related to 'eliefs (both big B's as well as small b's). Most of us censure ourselves on a daily basis (i. e. social PC), or censure others in our own minds (we ignore or don't listen (in one ear out the other)). AI forum ruleZ, anyone? Trying to define the debate by dictating a narrow definition of censorship, is IMHO a flawed premise. Why even debate it, narrow definition, you win, broad definition, I win. No boundaries for me, thank you! I definitely prefer a free exchange of ideas!

On Jobs, reading this thread, y'all sound like minions, for Christ's sake . NOT interested in the man behind the RDF curtain? NOT even a teeny-weeny-itsy-bitsy curious bone in your body? I wonder what the emperor's wearing today? I wonder how many of you would hold the same position if this was about BG (or SB) trash talk? What's that H word? Jobs is a major raincoater, get over it! If someone exposes themselves, I think it's appropriate to ask why (and who, what, when, where, and how). It's definitely a double-edged sword.

On a more serious note, this guy has been known to be writing a book about Jobs (i. e. MWSF05) for sometime now, apparently it's in publication now, this WILL happen. It's certainly appropriate for AI to give us the head's up!

On a less serious note, can someone please provide links to Hollywood Insider (nee HI) and Africanized B's?

Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #49 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Mero
What...are you...talking...about? Where is there any implication of racism towards Syrians in this entire thread or article?

The implication/tone was NOT intended I'm sure, but I too got an impression of racism here. I agree with him on that.

People are talking about the BAD things wealthy business leaders do, and how those things should be uncovered for the public. Phrases like "should be publicly critisized," "anything to hide," "Mr. jobbs is engaged in attempted censorship" (when in fact the article was pulled BEFORE Jobs responded), "pulling down other people," etc. are all focussed on BAD things about Jobs. And Jobs' ancestry is the fact in question here, after all. How is that bad?

Now, those phrases did NOT come from people talking about THIS situation. They were general statements about people in general, or maybe about the iCon book. So nobody was really saying that Steve' Jobs' racial background is a bad thing. It's something to be proud of, obviously, and yet far less important than the people who raised him.

So the implication may seem to be "Steve Jobs is of Syrian descent and the public deserves to know this awful truth!" But reading more carefully, I'm sure that position was never actually intended.
post #50 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by CosmoNut
AppleInsider stories: Journalism at its finest.

I see some editing on your part. I looked for the quotes you had and i did not see that in the article. Interesting.. was this a troll article, did you expect people not to have read the original article?. I haven't read all the post yet, i will just to see how many people fell for this troll.
post #51 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by wnurse
I see some editing on your part. I looked for the quotes you had and i did not see that in the article.

Dirty poker on some administrator or moderator's part. The italicized parts WERE there in the article. Notice I'm the first to respond to it. After I pointed it out they might have edited it.
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
Living life in glorious 4G HD (with a 2GB data cap).
Reply
post #52 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Anders
Third though: He could have been more communicative than "are you a nut case?" and stripping of press credentials. Like "yes I am a public figure but I would like to keep my private life private and I would prefer that you respected that". Then there would not have been a story at all.

you know, it's possible that he did (i know, unlikely, but possible... like maybe meteor crashing into the earth tomorrow killing us all kind of possible, but possible nonetheless), but you know, the media ONLY finds out about/pushes the "are you a nut case" e-mail, because it's jucier.

really, you've got to assume half to three-quarters of all info you receive is being spun for profit and advertisers for those information outlets. you've (not you-personally, anders, "you" in the generic sense) also got to stop worrying about how others handle their lives. heck, i live in "nosey-busy-body central" down here in my little 'burb of louisiana, where getting into the rumor mills and gossip is practically a contact sport, and it's truly just to fill up space in some people's very empty lives.
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
When you're lovers in a dangerous time,
You're made to feel as if your love's a crime.
Nothing worth having comes without some kind of fight.
Gotta kick at the darkness 'til it bleeds daylight.

-...
Reply
post #53 of 103
It can be difficult to be calm and moderated about something that affects us personally. And if this subject is something that Jobs hasn't wanted to think about over the years, seeing it in print might very well have caused him to respond that way.

His response could have been far worse. I think the authors' response to Jobs' remark shows even less care and intelligence. He must have realized that Jobs was upset about it. But he didn't think when he responded. His response was more on the order of "Oh yeah, you too".

It's sort of the response someone will make when they can't think of what to say.

"Your mother wears combat books!"

"Yours too!"

Brilliant thinking.
post #54 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
It can be difficult to be calm and moderated about something that affects us personally. And if this subject is something that Jobs hasn't wanted to think about over the years, seeing it in print might very well have caused him to respond that way.

His response could have been far worse. I think the authors' response to Jobs' remark shows even less care and intelligence. He must have realized that Jobs was upset about it. But he didn't think when he responded. His response was more on the order of "Oh yeah, you too".

It's sort of the response someone will make when they can't think of what to say.

"Your mother wears combat books!"

"Yours too!"

Brilliant thinking.

Well, Jobs response "are you a nut case" is just as brilliant as the author comeback (not that i am defending the author). Also, just because Jobs doesn't like something does not mean that other people should care. He doesn't run the world. You write as if the author should have been deeply caring about Jobs feelings, please!!.. Jobs is no pushover. You think Jobs hasn't been uncaring to some journalist?.. Now, I agree that were I in jobs position, i would not have wanted my private life published and i might have said something but at the same token, the author has a right to respond to whatever Jobs said. Asking someone if they are a nutcase is not caring. If someone asked me if i was a nutcase, i would not care about hurting their feelings or showing lack of care in my response, would you?.
Please people!!!.. stop the insanity. This is a story of a guy trying to make a buck and another guy doesn't want him to make a buck at his expense. End of story. Move on!!.. nothing here to see.
post #55 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by CosmoNut
Dirty poker on some administrator or moderator's part. The italicized parts WERE there in the article. Notice I'm the first to respond to it. After I pointed it out they might have edited it.

Possible, probably what happened.
post #56 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by wnurse
Well, Jobs response "are you a nut case" is just as brilliant as the author comeback (not that i am defending the author). Also, just because Jobs doesn't like something does not mean that other people should care. He doesn't run the world. You write as if the author should have been deeply caring about Jobs feelings, please!!.. Jobs is no pushover. You think Jobs hasn't been uncaring to some journalist?.. Now, I agree that were I in jobs position, i would not have wanted my private life published and i might have said something but at the same token, the author has a right to respond to whatever Jobs said. Asking someone if they are a nutcase is not caring. If someone asked me if i was a nutcase, i would not care about hurting their feelings or showing lack of care in my response, would you?.
Please people!!!.. stop the insanity. This is a story of a guy trying to make a buck and another guy doesn't want him to make a buck at his expense. End of story. Move on!!.. nothing here to see.

I think you missed my point. In fact, I know you did.

The very idea that the author sent Jobs a copy meant that he wanted to know what Jobs thought. His publishing company didn't think that his work was worth publishung so there is that as well.

I'm asure that if you were important enough for someone to go digging in your past, the past that you might want to forget about, and sends you the article through your own e-mail, you might get upset and mail an annoyed reply back as well. Look at all of the guys here who insult someone just because they disageee with them. It's human nature.

I'm not saying that Jod's reply was the best. But it was understandable. The author must of known that JOBs wouldn't have been pleases, as he has gone out of his way not to talk about it over the years, even when asked.

The authors reply was therefore childish. He was obviously looking for a reaction from Jobs, and he got it.

And to answer your last question. His answer back to Jobs, proves the point of "showing lack of care in my (his) response."
post #57 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
I think you missed my point. In fact, I know you did.

The very idea that the author sent Jobs a copy meant that he wanted to know what Jobs thought. His publishing company didn't think that his work was worth publishung so there is that as well.

I'm asure that if you were important enough for someone to go digging in your past, the past that you might want to forget about, and sends you the article through your own e-mail, you might get upset and mail an annoyed reply back as well. Look at all of the guys here who insult someone just because they disageee with them. It's human nature.

I'm not saying that Jod's reply was the best. But it was understandable. The author must of known that JOBs wouldn't have been pleases, as he has gone out of his way not to talk about it over the years, even when asked.

The authors reply was therefore childish. He was obviously looking for a reaction from Jobs, and he got it.

And to answer your last question. His answer back to Jobs, proves the point of "showing lack of care in my (his) response."

And you missed my point. So what if the publisher didn't want to publish it?. So what if the author wanted a response from Jobs?. So what if jobs responded the way he did?. So what if the author showed lack of care in his response?.
So what if the mighty jobs was not pleased.
That is my point. The only reason this is a story is because it involves Jobs, who is like the rock star of technology. Nothing out of the ordinary happened here. A guy is trying to write something about jobs, some publisher didn't think it was good enough to publish or did not want to for whatever reason (like that means something.. any journalist/author of some repute will tell you he was once rejected by some publisher). The guy sent Jobs a copy, Jobs was understandbly upset and made a stupid comment (how could jobs even begin to discern the mental state of the author is beyond me). The author made a snide remark back to Jobs. End of story. This is like two high school kids snipping at each other. Why is it even in the news??.


BTW, Jobs does not have the right to dictate what is written about him, when it is written, by whoom and where. He can get angry but if i was the author, i would have responded the same way. So what if you are upset.. boo hoo!!!. At the same token, the author is not guranteed his work will be published or even read. Seems fair to me.
post #58 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by wnurse
And you missed my point. So what if the publisher didn't want to publish it?. So what if the author wanted a response from Jobs?. So what if jobs responded the way he did?. So what if the author showed lack of care in his response?.
So what if the mighty jobs was not pleased.
That is my point. The only reason this is a story is because it involves Jobs, who is like the rock star of technology. Nothing out of the ordinary happened here. A guy is trying to write something about jobs, some publisher didn't think it was good enough to publish or did not want to for whatever reason (like that means something.. any journalist/author of some repute will tell you he was once rejected by some publisher). The guy sent Jobs a copy, Jobs was understandbly upset and made a stupid comment (how could jobs even begin to discern the mental state of the author is beyond me). The author made a snide remark back to Jobs. End of story. This is like two high school kids snipping at each other. Why is it even in the news??.


BTW, Jobs does not have the right to dictate what is written about him, when it is written, by whoom and where. He can get angry but if i was the author, i would have responded the same way. So what if you are upset.. boo hoo!!!. At the same token, the author is not guranteed his work will be published or even read. Seems fair to me.

Your problem can be seen very quickly. "the mighty Jobs", the "rock star of technology", There's some jealousy there no doubt, some anger as well.

To me, Jobs is a neutral character. I don't care one way or the other about his personal life, except to point out to my daughter, who is adopted, that here's another person for whom adoption wasn't a detriment (she likes to see people who were adopted).

This was a very difficult aspect to some people's lives. But I have nothing against him writing the article.

The point I made about it being rejected was that if it weren't, he most likely would never have sent it to Jobs in the first place. It was a publicity stunt on his part. He was hoping for a reaction from Jobs, who is known to be mercurial about discussion of his past personal life. As he has a right to be.

The author had to know, since he had researched him, that Job's response would be something like that. He was, if anything, hoping for it. So his response in turn, was childish.

The whole point to his sending this to Jobs was to rev up interest in it by some other publisher after it had been rejected by his own. It was a very cynical stunt. He should have come away from it, if anything, satisfied that he had gotten what he wanted out of it. His publicizing it, which he didn't have to do, shows that it was a stunt. his reaction, therefore, was strange, to say the least. He saw how sales of "iCon" rose after Jobs banned it from his stores. He was counting on this reaction to help hin as well.

Should Appleinsider have reported it? I don't know. Should the Star and The Enquirer, and People magazine, plus a hundred other publications, as well as Entertainment Tonight, and other TV shows like it, as well as gossip columns exist? I don't know that either.

But as long as people show an interest in what the "Rich and the Famous" do and think, they will.
post #59 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Your problem can be seen very quickly. "the mighty Jobs", the "rock star of technology", There's some jealousy there no doubt, some anger as well.

To me, Jobs is a neutral character. I don't care one way or the other about his personal life, except to point out to my daughter, who is adopted, that here's another person for whom adoption wasn't a detriment (she likes to see people who were adopted).

This was a very difficult aspect to some people's lives. But I have nothing against him writing the article.

The point I made about it being rejected was that if it weren't, he most likely would never have sent it to Jobs in the first place. It was a publicity stunt on his part. He was hoping for a reaction from Jobs, who is known to be mercurial about discussion of his past personal life. As he has a right to be.

The author had to know, since he had researched him, that Job's response would be something like that. He was, if anything, hoping for it. So his response in turn, was childish.

The whole point to his sending this to Jobs was to rev up interest in it by some other publisher after it had been rejected by his own. It was a very cynical stunt. He should have come away from it, if anything, satisfied that he had gotten what he wanted out of it. His publicizing it, which he didn't have to do, shows that it was a stunt. his reaction, therefore, was strange, to say the least. He saw how sales of "iCon" rose after Jobs banned it from his stores. He was counting on this reaction to help hin as well.

Should Appleinsider have reported it? I don't know. Should the Star and The Enquirer, and People magazine, plus a hundred other publications, as well as Entertainment Tonight, and other TV shows like it, as well as gossip columns exist? I don't know that either.

But as long as people show an interest in what the "Rich and the Famous" do and think, they will.

Jealous of Jobs?.. I want to be Jobs!!!!.. I just think apple fans are irrational. When this happens to Bill Gates, does it get reported?. Don't you think this has happened to Bill Gates?.. To other rich and famous people?. Mac people still have the inferiority complex.. anytime something negative about Apple or Jobs is said, we all go crying "mommy, the bully is picking on me". Geez.. my point is this is a non-story. We mac fans are so thin skinned. Apple is growing into a big company. It's time we shed the "us against the world" mentality. So someone tried to get a reaction out of Jobs to sell a book, BIG FUCKING DEAL. Today, somewhere in the world, someone else did the same thing to another famous person and tomorrow, they will do it again and the next day again, and again and again.

Ok.. maybe those people discuss it as much as we do.. If so, then i apologize. Let the discussion continue!!!. (besides, it's friday.. nobody gets real work done in the office on fridays)We might as well bash an author, it's seems a fun thing to do.
post #60 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by rtamesis
Maxwell wrote that article probably with the idea of directing anti-Arab and anti-Muslim sentiment against Steve Jobs. He probably thinks he can embarass Jobs by claiming that he is of Syrian descent, especially after the UN claimed that Syria was responsible for the assasination of former Lebanese Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. Maxwell clearly is nuts. Who knows, he may even be dangerous and turn violent.

Since you haven't read the article, nor ever met me, why do you find that you can post this libel?
post #61 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Mero
What...are you...talking...about? Where is there any implication of racism towards Syrians in this entire thread or article? And how on earth could you possibly derive that as your summary...hahaha. I do hope you were joking.



No, you didn't read a few pages of the "nut case's" work because it's not being sold on Amazon! The "nut case" text was read and subsiquently denied by his publisher. You are referring to the iCon biography, which is entirely seperate from the person whom Steve called a nut case and has nothing to do with the bulk of this appleinsider article except that it is another case where Steve did not endorse or warm up to works about him.

They were only using that example because otherwise the content of the article would have been entirely too short and even less news worthy then it already is.


The reason why they taught you that in ethics class and not Law class is because it is not at all true in a legal sense. A private citizen public figure is called a voluntary or involuntary public figure who may have to prove malice vs a fully private citizen who just has to prove negligence.

Steve Jobs is an all-purpose public figure, a member of a publicly traded company and someone who casts his image into public light on a regular basis.

Again, I and others just felt that this was not worthy of being covered by AI. But at the same time it's funny to see the "classic Steve" and this is a great discussion.

Again, I wrote the piece, and you haven't read it, yet somehow find that you can act as an expert not only on the piece but on my person. FYI: my former publisher hadn't read a word from the manuscript when he canceled the contract two days after MacWorld. But when has knowing what one is talking about been a requirement to post on a forum?
post #62 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by kiwimac
Steve Jobs is NOT a public figure, he didn't chose a profession like acting or singing or politics, he is a business man just cause that business is very successful doesn't mean he should be treated any differently from any other business man

Steve Jobs is clearly a public figure, one who craves the spotlight, yet wants to control it. That said, nothing I've ever written about anyone is libelous or has invaded their privacy. Again, knowing what you're talking about has never been a requirement for posting in this forum, has it?
post #63 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by wnurse
Jealous of Jobs?.. I want to be Jobs!!!!.. I just think apple fans are irrational. When this happens to Bill Gates, does it get reported?. Don't you think this has happened to Bill Gates?.. To other rich and famous people?. Mac people still have the inferiority complex.. anytime something negative about Apple or Jobs is said, we all go crying "mommy, the bully is picking on me". Geez.. my point is this is a non-story. We mac fans are so thin skinned. Apple is growing into a big company. It's time we shed the "us against the world" mentality. So someone tried to get a reaction out of Jobs to sell a book, BIG FUCKING DEAL. Today, somewhere in the world, someone else did the same thing to another famous person and tomorrow, they will do it again and the next day again, and again and again.

Ok.. maybe those people discuss it as much as we do.. If so, then i apologize. Let the discussion continue!!!. (besides, it's friday.. nobody gets real work done in the office on fridays)We might as well bash an author, it's seems a fun thing to do.

Sure it gets reported. If the person doing it reports it. Remember the pie in the face Gates took? But that was public.

This is different. This is private. Don't forget, if this guy didn't publicize it, we wouldn't know about it.

It's ridiculous of you to be talking about crybabies. You don't understand what we're talking about here.
post #64 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by wnurse
And you missed my point. So what if the publisher didn't want to publish it?. So what if the author wanted a response from Jobs?. So what if jobs responded the way he did?. So what if the author showed lack of care in his response?.
So what if the mighty jobs was not pleased.
That is my point. The only reason this is a story is because it involves Jobs, who is like the rock star of technology. Nothing out of the ordinary happened here. A guy is trying to write something about jobs, some publisher didn't think it was good enough to publish or did not want to for whatever reason (like that means something.. any journalist/author of some repute will tell you he was once rejected by some publisher). The guy sent Jobs a copy, Jobs was understandbly upset and made a stupid comment (how could jobs even begin to discern the mental state of the author is beyond me). The author made a snide remark back to Jobs. End of story. This is like two high school kids snipping at each other. Why is it even in the news??.


BTW, Jobs does not have the right to dictate what is written about him, when it is written, by whoom and where. He can get angry but if i was the author, i would have responded the same way. So what if you are upset.. boo hoo!!!. At the same token, the author is not guranteed his work will be published or even read. Seems fair to me.

Excellent response in many ways. However, to correct the record, my former publisher never rejected the book -- just canceled the contract two days after MacWorld (and demandded the advance back). I kept researching a small part of what I had, which turned into a piece that Fast Company said they liked, but killed. Jobs and Apple extoll liberal principles, but when it comes to books in general, and Jobs biographies in particular, they are very Bush-like in terms of retaliation. They even sued people who put stuff on web sites they didn't like. And by the way, if you read my New York Times Magazine piece about being investigated by not only Microsoft but the Secret Service while writing my last book, maybe you can understand that many a tech exec doesn't want to be written about, except in glowing terms, and there are hazzards for and to any author in doing so.
post #65 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Gyroscope
I don't want to hear about Steve Jobs biological father, Eric Schmidt's auntie, or Steve Ballmer's dog. This is gossip, not news.

Then don't read it. Your choice.
post #66 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Fredric Alan Maxwell
Steve Jobs is clearly a public figure, one who craves the spotlight, yet wants to control it. That said, nothing I've ever written about anyone is libelous or has invaded their privacy. Again, knowing what you're talking about has never been a requirement for posting in this forum, has it?

Of course he's a public figure.

But not in the way that actors or musicians are. They have publicity agents to get their names in the tabloids (even though they won't admit it).

Those people have only one product to sell. Themselves.

Jobs will get up on a stage as many CEO's do, at a meeting or an event to show new products. He's just good at it. He will also give the occasional interview as other CEO's do.

So while he is a public figure, he's not putting his life in front of us. He keeps his private life private.

While I don't have a problem with someone writing an article or book, even if it's not positive, this incident is odd to begin with.


EDIT: I didn't realise for a while that you are the author, so you can accept my apology for not referring to you directly. But there's no point in changing the post at this point, so I've left it as it is.

As I've said in some of my posts above, it;s what this guy was trying to do with the e-mail that is not right. That's my beef.

If his publisher thought that the book or article was fit to be published, I wouldn't have a problem with that.

Buy Jobs has the right to get pissed at this guy sending him material that he most likely wanted to forget all about.

Also, we don't know if he was angry because of what was written, or over the idea that the guy would sent it to him for a reaction.

It was also a private remark that Jobs had made. The kind of remark that we have all made at one time or another.

The only thing is that Jobs should have realized that this guy was doing it just for the publicity. But, maybe he did.
post #67 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Fredric Alan Maxwell
Then don't read it. Your choice.

Ok, so you're here with us. That's good.

If you've read my posts, you know what I think about this.

I , as I've said, have no problem with your writing the article.

But I would like an explanation as to why you felt it to be necessary to make your "confrontation" public.

Or are you going to say that it was not you that released it?

And why did you send him that in the first place. You must have known that he was reticent about it, and that he would react badly.

And, also, you didn't have to respond in such a schoolboy fashion. After all, it was you that wrote about him, not the other way around. He had a right to be ticked. You should have understood that.

Or is this whole story untrue?
post #68 of 103
I can't believe this story has dragged on like this in the comments section. Imagine that you were adopted. Imagine that you become well-known later in life. The matter of whether you go find your birth parents is one of the more deeply personal decisions you can make. In fact up until the '70s or '80s, in fact, it was illegal to look at your own adoption records, or for anyone else to look it up. They changed the law so you could go to the adoption authority, they would contact your birth parents, and IF THEY WANTED, they could give you a phone number or something.

Jobs has parents, whom he's often spoken of affectionately. They were good parents. They were his adoptive parents.

Why does this guy insist on knowing, or publicizing the identity of the people who gave Jobs up fifty years ago? That isn't "journalism," it's paparazzi crap. Of what value is it to us? Celebrity has gotten to be an incredible cross to bear in this society, because so many nutcases are out there, just like, well, this guy.
post #69 of 103
He doesn't seem to want to answer direct questions about this aspect, or the incident itself. As he bothered to come here into the thread itself, he should be willing to answer the hard aspects of this as well before leaving.

After all, he is a public figure, and shouldn't mind criticism, right?

At least, that's his argument.
post #70 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Fredric Alan Maxwell
Then don't read it. Your choice.

I don't believe I will read it. You would be as well off to choose something else to write about.
post #71 of 103
He seems to have left the building.
post #72 of 103
Sorry for my retarded responses AIers. I was posting on both Sherdog.net and here and guess I got carried away with the insults.

My bad.
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
post #73 of 103
Sorry for my retarded responses AIers. I was posting on both Sherdog.net and here and guess I got carried away with the insults.

My bad.
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
post #74 of 103
Oops!

Please delete one of my double posts mods.
tyvm
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
'If these words were people, I would embrace their genocide.' - Maddox
Reply
post #75 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Fredric Alan Maxwell
Steve Jobs is clearly a public figure, one who craves the spotlight, yet wants to control it. That said, nothing I've ever written about anyone is libelous or has invaded their privacy. Again, knowing what you're talking about has never been a requirement for posting in this forum, has it?

How can you say your not invading his privacy, you dig up dirt on a very very sensitive subject to any one in his position. In responce to you saying i don't know that i'm talking about the point of forum is for people to express and disscuss their ideas and views, there are bound to be different points of view.
post #76 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by melgross
Ok, so you're here with us. That's good.

If you've read my posts, you know what I think about this.

I , as I've said, have no problem with your writing the article.

But I would like an explanation as to why you felt it to be necessary to make your "confrontation" public.

Or are you going to say that it was not you that released it?

And why did you send him that in the first place. You must have known that he was reticent about it, and that he would react badly.

And, also, you didn't have to respond in such a schoolboy fashion. After all, it was you that wrote about him, not the other way around. He had a right to be ticked. You should have understood that.

Or is this whole story untrue?

I don't spend much time in chat rooms -- and, for some reason, it took a few days for me to get registered into this one -- so I hope you understand this is rather new to me.

Melgross, your arguments seem top-notch, and the questions the same: the big one being "Why did I publicize Jobs' reaction." Good question. Answer: I was working with the NY Daily News reporter on a related story -- I assure you, there's more about the Jobs' Birth Father piece and biography that will come out, probably in court as I'm suing, but that's another story (don't ask 'cause I'm not telling now). The fact that Jobs and Apple have become so hostile toward books in general, biographies in specific, and mine in particular came up. I have no proof Apple or Jobs had anything to do with my contract being canceled earlier this year -- just as I have no proof Microsoft or Steve Ballmer had anything to do with the Secret Service launching a full investigation of me while I was writing my bio of that Steve, though many many folk think so -- but it's rather strange. After all, the publisher came to me and asked if I'd consider writing a bio of Jobs. I wrote a proposal, accepted their offer, took the advance and came to Cali to further research the text. That it was canceled two days after MacWorld makes a strong argument for causality. After all, the publisher could have waited until the book was finished and not accepted it.

Recall that Apple sued three websites (oh, you probably know this is one of them) for something called "tortuous interference with contract." In fact, what the sites did was, possibly, take some of the wind out of Mr. Jobs' Mini-Mac announcement. The cases are being argued as I write this. A STRONG ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE THAT APPLE AND MAC WORLD TORTUOUSLY INTERFERED WITH MY CONTRACT.

I'd sent the piece off to others for their comments, and to Mr. Jobs as a professional courtesy.
I told the reporter what some well-known authors and editors said about it as well, along with Jobs' response. The Daily News made the choice of what to report. That's their job. I can tell you that the piece is being considered by two publications you know, and it might very well come down to who has the most guts to go with it. Or I might just keep it until the book is finished, whenever that is. But in no way, shape, or form did I invade Mr. Jobs' privacy or that of his birth father or mother and his biological sister, novelist Mona Simpson, or his current family. When you read the piece, you'll see how clear that is. Gotta run. Don't know when I'll be back.
post #77 of 103
Well, my only response is, "Are you a nutcase?"

It is of very little interest to me who Jobs' birth mother and father are. The nasty note he made on the draft would seem to be a good question. Now, the First Amendment is pretty near absolute, even for rats like yourself and Judith Miller and the celebrity papparazzi who get Hollywood starlets into car accidents. But don't ask me to love you, or buy your undoubtedly trashy book, and I think AppleInsider made an error in judgment publicizing it.
post #78 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Swift
Well, my only response is, "Are you a nutcase?"

Wow, no kiddin'.
post #79 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Fredric Alan Maxwell
I don't spend much time in chat rooms -- and, for some reason, it took a few days for me to get registered into this one -- so I hope you understand this is rather new to me.

Melgross, your arguments seem top-notch, and the questions the same: the big one being "Why did I publicize Jobs' reaction." Good question. Answer: I was working with the NY Daily News reporter on a related story -- I assure you, there's more about the Jobs' Birth Father piece and biography that will come out, probably in court as I'm suing, but that's another story (don't ask 'cause I'm not telling now). The fact that Jobs and Apple have become so hostile toward books in general, biographies in specific, and mine in particular came up. I have no proof Apple or Jobs had anything to do with my contract being canceled earlier this year -- just as I have no proof Microsoft or Steve Ballmer had anything to do with the Secret Service launching a full investigation of me while I was writing my bio of that Steve, though many many folk think so -- but it's rather strange. After all, the publisher came to me and asked if I'd consider writing a bio of Jobs. I wrote a proposal, accepted their offer, took the advance and came to Cali to further research the text. That it was canceled two days after MacWorld makes a strong argument for causality. After all, the publisher could have waited until the book was finished and not accepted it.

Recall that Apple sued three websites (oh, you probably know this is one of them) for something called "tortuous interference with contract." In fact, what the sites did was, possibly, take some of the wind out of Mr. Jobs' Mini-Mac announcement. The cases are being argued as I write this. A STRONG ARGUMENT CAN BE MADE THAT APPLE AND MAC WORLD TORTUOUSLY INTERFERED WITH MY CONTRACT.

I'd sent the piece off to others for their comments, and to Mr. Jobs as a professional courtesy.
I told the reporter what some well-known authors and editors said about it as well, along with Jobs' response. The Daily News made the choice of what to report. That's their job. I can tell you that the piece is being considered by two publications you know, and it might very well come down to who has the most guts to go with it. Or I might just keep it until the book is finished, whenever that is. But in no way, shape, or form did I invade Mr. Jobs' privacy or that of his birth father or mother and his biological sister, novelist Mona Simpson, or his current family. When you read the piece, you'll see how clear that is. Gotta run. Don't know when I'll be back.

Well, the Daily News is not exactly a yop notch organization. You must know that now.

While I certainly can't speak to what happened to you over Gates and Ballmer, I can't see why a publication would bow to Jobs and company. Wiley found that it's sales were far better than expected after Jobs banned them.

As an author you must know the value of forbidden fruit. An unauthorized biography is, after all, just that. And information about an adoptee's birth family, even if it isn't an "invasion", is going to be torture for all involved. Surely you know this as well. Ans as my daughter is adopted, I know this as well also, even though out relations with them has been very good.

If you have evidence that Jobs &Co. intefered with your contract, then you have the right to sue. If not, you could end up paying court costs.
post #80 of 103
Quote:
Originally posted by Swift
Well, my only response is, "Are you a nutcase?"

It is of very little interest to me who Jobs' birth mother and father are. The nasty note he made on the draft would seem to be a good question. Now, the First Amendment is pretty near absolute, even for rats like yourself and Judith Miller and the celebrity papparazzi who get Hollywood starlets into car accidents. But don't ask me to love you, or buy your undoubtedly trashy book, and I think AppleInsider made an error in judgment publicizing it.

Well, at least he's willing to respond. That's more than I can say about most others.

Whether or not we may like the book is something else altogether. He does have the right to write it.

People rarely are happy about "unauthorized" biographies.

If what he says is true in his response to me, both about what he wrote and the contract, he might not be the one who is wrong.

We'll see.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: General Discussion
AppleInsider › Forums › General › General Discussion › Jobs asks author: "Are you a nut case?"