Think Secret : Ban On Rumor Press at MWNY

13

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 66
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    I'm not going to comment on this.



    I do know this may affect us in a *very* adverse manner in the near future, though.





    I can't say more than that publicly.





    <a href="http://mailto:[email protected]"; target="_blank">j.</a>
  • Reply 42 of 66
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,038member
    Well, I see serious problems with a "blacklist". I also see serious problems with Apple deciding what news sites come and what don't.
  • Reply 42 of 66
    kcmackcmac Posts: 1,051member
    I agree with John Manzione in this article.



    <a href="http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=106_0_1_0_M"; target="_blank">http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=106_0_1_0_M</a>;



    While I hope that Apple doesn't go too far in irritating the mac web, a "press" badge should have a meaning. Are these mac sites really members of the "press"?
  • Reply 44 of 66
    paulpaul Posts: 5,278member
    [quote]Originally posted by Jonathan:

    <strong>I'm not going to comment on this.



    I do know this may affect us in a *very* adverse manner in the near future, though.





    I can't say more than that publicly.





    <a href="http://mailto:[email protected]"; target="_blank">j.</a></strong><hr></blockquote>

    if Jon is talking about what im thinking he is talking about, this could be really bad...



    Is MacNN going to stop AI from using their server? (not directed to Jon as he doesnt want to talk about it publicly...)



    <img src="graemlins/bugeye.gif" border="0" alt="[Skeptical]" /> what is going on here?...
  • Reply 45 of 66
    salmonstksalmonstk Posts: 560member
    Yes this is a very good article on all of this. Rumors or not. most of these places are not worthy of a press pass anywhere. They may be great sites with great content. But these people are not journalists.



    [quote]Originally posted by kcmac:

    <strong>I agree with John Manzione in this article.



    <a href="http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=106_0_1_0_M"; target="_blank">http://www.macnet2.com/more.php?id=106_0_1_0_M</a>;



    While I hope that Apple doesn't go too far in irritating the mac web, a "press" badge should have a meaning. Are these mac sites really members of the "press"?</strong><hr></blockquote>
  • Reply 46 of 66
    true, there have been in recent years many people with press creds that don't deserve them (I counted a lot in the press lounge at mwsf), but on the flip side, there are a lot of people being blacklisted that do deserve them.
  • Reply 47 of 66
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Mr Manzione would genuflect before one of Steve Jobs' turds if they put it in a white box with "think different" written on the side.
  • Reply 48 of 66
    buonrottobuonrotto Posts: 6,368member
    Yeah, the rumor site blacklist had too many holes in it. The currently understood rationale still has holes, some pretty legit sites (are these all web sites, by the way?) are caught in the mess. i'm really surprised about MacCentral. Frankly, I thought of them as the third party site that delivered the 'official version' of Apple news. Dunno, it's a real mess right now to try to get into people's heads.
  • Reply 49 of 66
    kukukuku Posts: 254member
    Things ARE stirring up it seems. This might be a begining to a covert war in atempt to push back this imaginary line.



    Apparently some bigger names that have been "blacklisted" have been revealed which means expotentionally more people to take up the war flag.



    Some sites are down playing it like MacFixit.com, but it's not all just "shady people", when the "Hero's" of a community get hit, things will escalate.



    ~Kuku
  • Reply 50 of 66
    drewpropsdrewprops Posts: 2,321member
    I didn't realize this was as big as it now looks to be. I empathize with Apple's desire to stem the flow of information which might directly affect sales or competition with rival manufacturers, but this decision seems trivial.



    One of the many articles on this subject mentioned that there was some type of "security" problem at this year's MWSF.



    I call bullshit.



    Don't try to cash in on our spookishness about security in this atmosphere of terrorism. A general statement like that reeks of a made-up story. What kind of security breach occurred? Did somebody see something they weren't supposed to see? Did someone approach Steve Jobs that didn't have clearance? Just stating that there was a security problem gives them all the leverage that they need to justify this blackout.



    Perhaps people should wear black arm bands or something to express their dissatisfaction with Apple's heavy-handed smack down. Even less honorable is that Apple is trying to hide the fact that they're behind the banishments...like THAT information is going to be kept secret.



    They should try concentrating more on product development and less on the cloak and dagger. Someone should explain to Apple's PR director that she doesn't work for the CIA.



    I wouldn't be surprised if you folks who go to Macworld start chanting "RU-mors, RU-mors, RU-mors" when Steve first walks out on stage. Or the black arm-bands thing. Or hand out leaflets explaining what's going on.



    I'm just concerned about what Jonathan said about this affecting AI in some adverse manner. I suppose I better go make sure tha Bad Flamingo is still up and running.....



    D



    [ 07-06-2002: Message edited by: drewprops ]</p>
  • Reply 51 of 66
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    [quote]Originally posted by drewprops:

    <strong>I didn't realize this was as big as it now looks to be. I empathize with Apple's desire to stem the flow of information which might directly affect sales or competition with rival manufacturers, but this decision seems trivial.</strong><hr></blockquote>



    Exactly. While I haven't head back from a handful of sites that are probably on the blacklist, I'm willing to bet they are. I'm also willing to bet MacNN is. I bet a lot of people here actually read MacNN on a regular basis. So now that it hits a little closer to home, do you still agree with Apple's decision? Hypothetically, if MacNN is denied press creds, do you not consider MacNN worthy either? Really, what would MacNN need to do to be considered a truly worthwhile commercial news outlet? And I'd like to reinforce that this is a hypothetical scenario, as I don't know if they have or have not been denied. They ran the story as to what Apple is doing, and conveninently did not mention their status. It would seem the sites that *are* on the list have decided to ignore the story altogether.



  • Reply 52 of 66
    matsumatsu Posts: 6,558member
    Apple stock holders be weary. Apple is showing hints of a company looking around for people to blame. That's not good. It's not a strategy either, but it's deep in their company consciousness now. They know how far behind the hardware curve they are and the kind of perception that creates in the market. They're lashing out at any possible barrier to increased sales. The rumor/speculation/fan community is an easy target even if the rumor/fan culture has done more to help Apple than hurt it. Sure, some will say it makes people hold off on purchases, but that's BS. A few turkeys on tese boards obsess about the perfect time to buy, everyone else just buys when the deal is right. Rumors and speculation are worth more to Apple in FREE publicity simply for the buzz that they create and sustain than for any possible delayed/lost sales (multiplied many times over.) People know which end is up, only a dozen rabid idiots on any particular board believe the like of Kormac's crap.



    Oh god I'm tired and that made no sense, good night.
  • Reply 53 of 66
    amorphamorph Posts: 7,112member
    The crown jewel, as MacWEEK alumnus Matthew Rothenberg points out in his <a href="http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,3959,338390,00.asp"; target="_blank">eWeek column</a>, is that Apple is only picking on the news sites that are too small to fight back. Rothenberg's got his press pass, of course - even though he's made a career dishing Apple rumors every morning with coffee - for the simple reason that Ziff-Davis is big enough to tell Apple's PR firm to piss off.



    As others have said, we're not talking about content-free fanzines on GeoCities. Ted Landau got his press pass yanked. Who's next? Ric Ford? Gene Steinberg? The presciently prudent Adam Engst might be the only independent web writer who gets to go to the next MacWorld at this rate.



    This will change the nature of things. Sure, the keynote's streamed, but the keynote is not the Expo. There are employees from all kinds of companies on the show floor, and (scant) opportunities for spy photography, and also a chance to take newly released products for a spin before other sites do.



    One could argue that Apple is within their rights to do this. Leaving aside arguments about the crucial role of the press - which Apple clearly does not give two figs about - we'll see if this is a good idea politically. I doubt it. Generally, it's not the brightest idea in the world to snub people with bully pulpits, especially when their industry is one of your biggest customers.



    As for our little corner of the Web, it is significant that AI was yanked from MacNN's link page, but in what way it is significant is still TBD.



    [ 07-06-2002: Message edited by: Amorph ]</p>
  • Reply 54 of 66
    sdw2001sdw2001 Posts: 17,038member
    I wonder how many emails Ms. Welch at Apple has gotten?



    This seems to be getting big. Go read GraphicPower's "last (ever) post". It is scathing. Now, Apple has fan sites saying they will never buy another Mac again.



    Good Job.
  • Reply 55 of 66
    drewpropsdrewprops Posts: 2,321member
    If anyone wants to express your concern about this situation you may want to inquire upon the PR person Nathalie Welch @ (408) 974-5430 and at [email protected].



    This information is from the Press Info section of Apple's website. If you have friends who'd like to write in and ask questions you might want to pass this information along. Maybe more light could be shed on this situation? Perhaps it's just a big misunderstanding.



    Gosh, I hope a bunch of people don't start passing this information around though, it wouldn't be good if she got too much email....



  • Reply 56 of 66
    ghost_user_nameghost_user_name Posts: 22,667member
    <a href="http://slashdot.org/"; target="_blank">Slashdot</a> picked up this story today. Reading the comments, a lot of people place an emphasis on the idea that Apple is doing this to attempt to control leaks of product announcements. Thinking about this, it confuses me...



    For starters, these sites publish information between expos. They tend not to get their insider information from talking to people at Macworld... simply denying some of these sites a press badge won't stop them from reporting unwanted information. When I was publishing Mac 3D and I went to a show, I had individual meetings with a lot of companies, and they met with me because I had press credentials. I took the information gathered from those meetings and wrote up articles in the press lounge while having a soda, then published them.



    I'd really like to know what Apple's motives are in regards to this. Perhaps they are trying to save money on free food in the press lounge by issuing less press credentials... but by not giving sites press creds at a Macworld... you're really limiting their ability to the press lounge, the users conferences, and meeting with other companies... although I'm sure these companies wouldn't have a problem meeting with you even if you had an exhibits only badge and explained the situation.



    I guess the point is that I don't see how this action is in any way, shape, or form controlling the media. They're not going to stop sites from publishing articles they don't like. I'd really like to hear an official explanation, because there really is no good reason....
  • Reply 57 of 66
    drewpropsdrewprops Posts: 2,321member
    I wouldn't put it past Apple to discourage product reps to refrain from communicating with the un-authorized press. Of course, these other companies are going to say "pshaw, we'll talk to anyone we choose".



    Just don't be surprised if you hear of this happening on the floor......



    D
  • Reply 58 of 66
    WOW, this is cool. Check this out.



    <a href="http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/01/06/macworld.predictions.idg/index.html"; target="_blank">http://www.cnn.com/2000/TECH/computing/01/06/macworld.predictions.idg/index.html</a>;



    This is from quite a while back but still... don't you see the implications? Even CNN runs rumor stuff. Did THEY get banned? Another odd note, no mention of this years MacWorld at all. If it's big news wouldn't Apple tip them off to run a story? They usually do about a week or two prior to the show. The story kinda leaves you baited and hanging. Just thought I'd share this.
  • Reply 59 of 66
    drewpropsdrewprops Posts: 2,321member
    And the story continues to run.



    This time on ZDnet, David Coursey pulls the entire brouhaha into the light of day and goes so far as to entertain the notion of "deputizing" some of these black-balled reporters as his own reporting posse for ZDnet.



    Delicious idea, that.



    I sent about four or five links off to Bob Cringely who has a short-but-interesting weekly newsletter with "insider" rumors in the IT biz. Although this isn't too much of a rumor, it sure would make interesting press. I hope that the story makes it into his newsletter! That would be fun....



    D



    [ 07-10-2002: Message edited by: drewprops ]</p>
  • Reply 60 of 66
    drewpropsdrewprops Posts: 2,321member
    well now I know, just editing and old post doesn't qualify as a new posting.....so:



    BUMP
Sign In or Register to comment.