Methinks this guy sounds just a little too enthusiastic to embrace the BANNED BY APPLE! label. He and his publisher appear to have gotten a couple of very unhappy phone calls from Apple PR. Is that news, at this point? Isn't that rather more DOG BITES MAN than the other way around?
Wake me up when the lawsuit is filed. (And, given the relatively pitiful requirements for a libel lawsuit in the UK -- bless you, authors of the First Amendment -- even that might barely be news.)
Apple under Jobs is a secretive company, but the sight of so many ghouls counting the days until Steve Jobs' death has made it easy to empathize with his desire to tell celebrity journalists, in no uncertain terms, to piss off.
Dunno if I'd personally hold up a story that speculated on a Google/Apple merger (because, ya know, Eric Schmidt) as a martyr for the sanctity of journalism.
11 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 30.2 ms ] threadWake me up when the lawsuit is filed. (And, given the relatively pitiful requirements for a libel lawsuit in the UK -- bless you, authors of the First Amendment -- even that might barely be news.)
Apple under Jobs is a secretive company, but the sight of so many ghouls counting the days until Steve Jobs' death has made it easy to empathize with his desire to tell celebrity journalists, in no uncertain terms, to piss off.
You're right of course, but a dirt-digging, speculative, news-free 4000 word article has got to attract some advertising viewers somehow.
I want to believe "Newspapers are the walking dead" when I waste my time with this. But yet, here we are, increasing their viewership...
Ok, that was funny.
Really? Their respective corporate personalities seem to be highly incompatible.