The way tech covers Apple is ridiculous(scripting.com)
scripting.com
The way tech covers Apple is ridiculous
http://scripting.com/2013/10/22/theWayTechCoversAppleIsRidiculous
16 comments
This article is not about Apple, it's about the tech press's failure to uncover big stories such as the NSA case. Yet the author chose to tack on a cookie-cutter lede about Apple and to make the title about Apple. Seems hypocritical.
the author chose to tack on a cookie-cutter lede about Apple and to make the title about Apple. Seems hypocritical.
Also, seems like an effective demonstration of the very point he's making.
Also, seems like an effective demonstration of the very point he's making.
I'd be interested to hear from the author if this was on purpose.
I agree that this is not about Apple. In fact, it's an article about politics, but seen through the glasses of a person interested in tech.
People care about Apple products because they seem to be on the forefront of new things coming out. In many ways, they were the first to really make smartphones and tablets popular. So people want to know what they'll do next, because that'll likely be the direction that all related technology moves. Recently, it's been incremental updates. But eventually they'll announce something new: a TV, a streaming TV model, etc.
And as for it being mostly iterative changes: Personally, I don't view the new fingerprint scanner as simply iterative. Between iCloud Keychain and the fingerprint scanner, I think they are going to change the way we think of passwords. I think that's their play to make 2-factor auth mainstream. Sure, other devices have had fingerprint scanners (I had the Motorola Atrix 4g, which was an early Android inclusion of fingerprint scanner). But to make it really work, and integrate it somewhat into apps (so far it's just iTunes, but I imagine that'll change) is the real magic. I expect this to be a big change in the mobile industry in the coming years.
People care about Apple products because they seem to be on the forefront of new things coming out. In many ways, they were the first to really make smartphones and tablets popular. So people want to know what they'll do next, because that'll likely be the direction that all related technology moves. Recently, it's been incremental updates. But eventually they'll announce something new: a TV, a streaming TV model, etc.
And as for it being mostly iterative changes: Personally, I don't view the new fingerprint scanner as simply iterative. Between iCloud Keychain and the fingerprint scanner, I think they are going to change the way we think of passwords. I think that's their play to make 2-factor auth mainstream. Sure, other devices have had fingerprint scanners (I had the Motorola Atrix 4g, which was an early Android inclusion of fingerprint scanner). But to make it really work, and integrate it somewhat into apps (so far it's just iTunes, but I imagine that'll change) is the real magic. I expect this to be a big change in the mobile industry in the coming years.
The problem is that "tech journalists" tend to actually be business journalists. They aren't investigative journalists looking to uncover the workings and untrue assumptions of society increasingly dependent on tech. Most of them do just want to cover new companies & new products & other business news. Many of them invest in those very companies or have spouses in that business community. Yes it is a problem the way tech covers Apple compared to the way tech covers NSA. But what it reveals is that tech journalists aren't the type of journalists we need (definitely not journalists in the 4th branch of government sense) and that investigative journalists need to learn more about tech.
Are there any non-business journalists left? last time I checked CNN had no war correspondents anymore and most news sites have turned into gossip rags not that different from tabloids a decade ago.
I think the core problem is that tech is not so important for most people to care about the wrongdoings of the industry and because no pageviews=no money then nobody runs the story.
I think the core problem is that tech is not so important for most people to care about the wrongdoings of the industry and because no pageviews=no money then nobody runs the story.
Stop thinking of it as tech news and think of it as tech business news. It's news for investors, people who would like to be invested in, fashion-conscious consumers, and people who enjoy living vicariously through all three groups.
A blog that focused on computer technology would rarely have features on Apple, because they rarely (if ever?) innovate on technology. Also no one cares, other than techies, and it would be covered as badly as all other popular science, by non-techies.
People care about Apple because it can make (or lose) them money, or it provides conversational material amongst people who share an interest in the current fashion of that brand.
The coverage of different fashion houses, their shows, collections, brands, and retailers they're selling to or who are showing interest isn't materially different than popular tech coverage.
A blog that focused on computer technology would rarely have features on Apple, because they rarely (if ever?) innovate on technology. Also no one cares, other than techies, and it would be covered as badly as all other popular science, by non-techies.
People care about Apple because it can make (or lose) them money, or it provides conversational material amongst people who share an interest in the current fashion of that brand.
The coverage of different fashion houses, their shows, collections, brands, and retailers they're selling to or who are showing interest isn't materially different than popular tech coverage.
A good point to note is that none of the major reports on snowden leaks came from tech journalists. The best op-eds and reporting came from the Guardian, WaPo and other main stream outlets. This speaks volumes about the path taken by Tech Journalists.
Having said that, I am not sure tech news sites (mashable, techcrunch, cnet etc) are capable of "newsie" stuff. A lot of the top "Reporters" who established the industry were techies first, journalists next. We need more traditional journalists understanding and writing about the tech industry (not in a naive way, which is what happens in traditional outlets these days) in a competent manner. This will probably lead to the kind of journalism the author hopes for
I think you meant "The way the press covers tech is ridiculous".
Regardless, you've got a good point. As the press adapts to new technology influencing the way it does reporting, so much it adapt to the subjects which it reports on. This is an ongoing process and I think that it is happening. The NSA case is actually a good example of that, since although maybe it could have been covered in a better way, or earlier (as seems to be your point), it was still covered quite comprehensively and continues to be covered by many organisations.
Regardless, you've got a good point. As the press adapts to new technology influencing the way it does reporting, so much it adapt to the subjects which it reports on. This is an ongoing process and I think that it is happening. The NSA case is actually a good example of that, since although maybe it could have been covered in a better way, or earlier (as seems to be your point), it was still covered quite comprehensively and continues to be covered by many organisations.
I think this author should have used the title "The way journalists cover tech is ridiculously bad", which would be true of all sectors. I do think that there are definitely legitimate tech aspects in current events, like the NSA and HealthCare.gov, that should be addressed by experts. Instead we have critics who try to "explain" what is wrong with the technology, etc. revealing their incompetence to those who actually know/understand the topic. Really tech savvy people should definitely make an effort to debunk claims that are made by non-experts on tech topics, and not just share there knowledge amongst already tech savvy people.
This dude looses me half way through - I think that adults can compartmentalise and choose between international news and hobby tech news. And lets not forget that modern technology is freekin incredible and Apple is the premier brand.
> Where were all the comp sci grads going? Some were going to Redmond and Silicon Valley for sure. But a lot of them were going to Maryland and Virginia.
Well that's hardly a story, and not the point of the Snowden leaks.
> Why were none of these stories broken before? Couldn't sources have been found to talk off the record? Weren't there people of conscience inside the tech companies who might tell the truth?
What if they're all okay with the things they know about?
Well that's hardly a story, and not the point of the Snowden leaks.
> Why were none of these stories broken before? Couldn't sources have been found to talk off the record? Weren't there people of conscience inside the tech companies who might tell the truth?
What if they're all okay with the things they know about?
There seems to be some confusion here. Covering an Apple product announcement isn't "tech news" its the the "tech news" equivalent of People Magazine. You can't look at their coverage and say its stealing coverage away from "real tech news" any more then People Magazine steals eyeballs from the Financial Times.
Tech covers Apple for page views and advertisement impressions. Don't take it personally. They're businesses. They're just doing what makes fiscal sense. They'll get far more revenue from Apple articles than Snowden.
Apple events are extremely popular in the media because the media participates in circle-jerking. Decades ago Apple did not have as much media spotlight, but after key hardware releases (e.g. iPod, iMac) the media began to grow its spotlight on Apple. They knew people loved reading about Apple, so they continued to place all bets on spotlighting Apple during its events knowing the return would be high. Even if Apple was not having an event, the media would artificially build hype by spreading rumors about Apple products, knowing readers would click.
The media does this with everything. Celebrity scandals, politics, etc.
Apple events are extremely popular in the media because the media participates in circle-jerking. Decades ago Apple did not have as much media spotlight, but after key hardware releases (e.g. iPod, iMac) the media began to grow its spotlight on Apple. They knew people loved reading about Apple, so they continued to place all bets on spotlighting Apple during its events knowing the return would be high. Even if Apple was not having an event, the media would artificially build hype by spreading rumors about Apple products, knowing readers would click.
The media does this with everything. Celebrity scandals, politics, etc.
Does this guy not get how journalism is structured? The senior reporter handles the big stories. The lesser reporters handle the tech releases. It's a bit muddled in the modern digital world but not as much as this guy would like to have you believe. Got pages to fill and there is too much news for a single person. Look back at any major story. The explosive headline/story about the JFK assassination or 911 was followed a few sections in by home and gardens, and entertainment. I've seen many more NSA stories since the Snowden story broke than apple stories both here, other tech blogs, and general news sites I follow.
He only jabs at Apple but this happens with any new consumer product. The title is very miss leading; it should be "The way tech covers tech is ridiculous."
How about "The way media covers apple is ridiculous."?
Not every new consumer product gets a mention on national nightly news when a new iteration arrives. I find that odd and gives less credibility to the news organization in my mind.
Not every new consumer product gets a mention on national nightly news when a new iteration arrives. I find that odd and gives less credibility to the news organization in my mind.
The reason is that the press is waiting for Apple to drop that next hit as they did with the iPhone, iPod etc. They want to be there when it happens and report it first. The thing is that in between those hits, you have down periods where Apple is just going to put out incremental updates, add colors, change sizes and change materials. When that hit drops, every press outlet wants to say "This is where you heard it first."
It's not that tech news it out-of-whack, people (albeit non-technical) care about the latest iPad. Such events represent for "tech reporters" short windows to report on something that a broader audience will consume & appreciate.
Online news is about chasing pageviews, not conveying truth or looking out for the public interest. It pays them more to milk the bajeezus out of Apple events by spinning each minor bullet point into complete articles.
Its all about page views. Apple has a very loyal fanbase
Also a very large anti-fanbase.
Well whatever the case, they get coverage because they know it will get attention and interest from people. They write whats gonna be read. Either thats people reading how bad the new Apple products are or how new and innovative they are.
And the OP link plays to both of these. Like an Apple story.