Can you still support the First Amendment, the blogging community and all that is holy in journalism, and still think that what Gizmodo did re: the lost iPhone was kind of sleazy? Is Gizmodo’s crime one of an ethical/moral nature, or one that is worthy of a police raid by elite members of SWAT — Seeking Whatever Apple Targets? And were there any other examples of less-than-stellar behavior on the part of average folks not associated with the media or major technology corporations?
I don't see this as a First Amendment issue. Gizmodo is free to publish anything they want to say about the iPhone.
The issue is whether they can buy stolen property to obtain a prototype device, then dissect it and publish the results to the world, for the purpose of making money for themselves. And the answer had damned well better be "No".
I think this should be treated as industrial espionage. Gizmodo's careless, paparazzi journalism may have cost Apple and its investors millions of dollars, and just so they could get more hits on their website. They would be ripe for a lawsuit from Apple's investors, if they had any assets.
A journalist's ID is not a license to steal. What's next... breaking into Apple's labs? Consider this scenario: an Apple employee drops his ID badge and electronic pass-key in a bar. Someone finds it and sells it to Gizmodo. They use it gain entry to Apple's lab (they would claim they were returning the badge to Apple!) and while they're there they snap photos of Apple's prototypes, and publish those.
That's essentially what they did. When they cracked open that prototype, they were invading Apple's private property, to which they had only gained access through an accidental loss.
Thank you for your trust. And I trust you will never be going to a restaurant or bar EVER, since their employees are so "untrustworthy"? Honesty is an unspoken code of honor in the services industry that does not seem to trickle down to apply to "journalists". Or at least they don't think it should. Why not just give it to the Police and not dink with it if "the bartender is so untrustworthy" and be done with it? Too logical? It goes without saying turning it in is what one should do. Powell came back and asked the "untrustworthy" staff if anyone had turned it in, counting on the "honesty" of the person that found it. As would or should anyone. Obviously he placed trust in both the staff and the person that found it. He was only half right.
I hope the staff's at all the bars and restaurants that you go to, that's right you don't go to them because the employees "can't be trusted", do not find out about your comments. It'll be hell to get a table and service. Damn! Look at me. I'm acting and talking just like all those slighted "journalists".
Sir, you are as misguided as Hogan and Chen are guilty.
Why is there an assumption that the manager or bartender at a bar is more honest or ethical than a customer? Rather than GIVE a found device to the manager, why not give them your phone number so if someone comes looking for a lost device the manager can give the searcher your number. Yeah it's more trouble, but I trust myself more than some guy working at a restaurant. Plus that way someone might actually thank me, (hopefully someone hot) instead of the bartender looking at me like I am crazy.
Loading ...
Lost iPhone Brings Scoundrels, Sharks and Shysters Out of the Woodwork
Posted by: Renay San Miguel April 30, 2010 05:00 AMCan you still support the First Amendment, the blogging community and all that is holy in journalism, and still think that what Gizmodo did re: the lost iPhone was kind of sleazy? Is Gizmodo’s crime one of an ethical/moral nature, or one that is worthy of a police raid by elite members of SWAT — Seeking Whatever Apple Targets? And were there any other examples of less-than-stellar behavior on the part of average folks not associated with the media or major technology corporations?
The issue is whether they can buy stolen property to obtain a prototype device, then dissect it and publish the results to the world, for the purpose of making money for themselves. And the answer had damned well better be "No".
I think this should be treated as industrial espionage. Gizmodo's careless, paparazzi journalism may have cost Apple and its investors millions of dollars, and just so they could get more hits on their website. They would be ripe for a lawsuit from Apple's investors, if they had any assets.
A journalist's ID is not a license to steal. What's next... breaking into Apple's labs? Consider this scenario: an Apple employee drops his ID badge and electronic pass-key in a bar. Someone finds it and sells it to Gizmodo. They use it gain entry to Apple's lab (they would claim they were returning the badge to Apple!) and while they're there they snap photos of Apple's prototypes, and publish those.
That's essentially what they did. When they cracked open that prototype, they were invading Apple's private property, to which they had only gained access through an accidental loss.
I hope the staff's at all the bars and restaurants that you go to, that's right you don't go to them because the employees "can't be trusted", do not find out about your comments. It'll be hell to get a table and service. Damn! Look at me. I'm acting and talking just like all those slighted "journalists".
Sir, you are as misguided as Hogan and Chen are guilty.
AmzdCnfsd, excellent job.