Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Gizmodo Not Welcome at 2010 WWDC

timothy posted more than 4 years ago | from the not-until-you-apologize-mister dept.

The Media 395

recoiledsnake writes "Gizmodo is reporting that Apple has refused to answer its request to attend the company's big Worldwide Developers Conference keynote this Monday. Apple's move to ban Gizmodo seems a direct repercussion of Apple's prototype leak by Gizmodo and subsequent actions of Apple to get the prototype back. Meanwhile, Gizmodo said that it would resort to a live blog to cover the event in case of the ban. This comes a few days after San Mateo County authorities announced that a 'special master' had been appointed to assist in the search of Gizmodo editor Jason Chen's belongings: goods seized as part of a police investigation into the disappearance (and Gizmodo acquisition) of one of Apple's prototype iPhones. It's the very device that's rumored to be announced at the Monday keynote."

cancel ×

395 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

WRIST (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477542)

LOLFRISTPOSRT no to trigger lolz

I do not have a problem with this ... (0, Troll)

P1aGu3ed (979864) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477550)

Gizmodo crossed the line, you do not bite the hand that feeds you. They need to be taught a lesson.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (5, Insightful)

Moryath (553296) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477630)

I hope you were joking.

This kind of shit is par for the course today, and it's the reason it is hard to trust journalists these days. Most so-called reviews out there - especially larger sites - are essentially paid-for ads. It's a rare day that a bad game or bad product gets panned like it deserves, because the editors are always worried about (a) the company pulling their ad dollars, (b) the company pulling product support away, or (c) the company launching some frivolous lawsuit just to burn up cash.

Remember the Kane & Lynch Eidos/Gamespot fiasco? Ever watched Farhad Manjoo at Slate change his tune to whatever Apple/Google want him to say on a given day, even if they were saying the opposite last week?

How about Rockstar's bullshit [geek.com] recently at a reviewer who didn't like Red Dead Redemption? I wonder how many people Rockstar paid off to get the "critical acclaim" for their boring western sandbox... er litterbox gameplay.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (2, Insightful)

couchslug (175151) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477758)

That's why I don't look to journalists for product information any more than I would seek it from dead-tree media that depend on adverts.

I don't need to be an early adopter (let them take the risks, they will) so I wait until the folks on enough different forums I lurk in report problems with (electronics, vehicles, whatever) before considering a buy. Pissed off people are more than ready to expose defects.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (5, Insightful)

Your.Master (1088569) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477790)

I agree in general that a journalistic site should not fear biting the hand that feeds them, for the sake of integrity.

But Gizmodo has already proven that they do not have integrity. They fenced stolen property and then attempted blackmail/extortion on Apple, very very recently. It's not some 10 year old grudge, the fallout of this shit is still happening. This sort of behaviour really should not be condoned, and nobody should expect it to be.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (5, Insightful)

mlingojones (919531) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477794)

Rockstar and Eidos just didn't like the reviews, though. Gizmodo actually committed a felony.

It's not that Apple didn't like the press, it's that Gizmodo stole their property.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477920)

And then wouldn't give it back without an "official confirmation" by apple. They were trying to hold the prototype hostage for an inside scoop.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (0)

Joe U (443617) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478036)

Yeah, imagine wanting to verify the owner before handing it over.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (1, Informative)

halivar (535827) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478136)

Apple had already privately confirmed it. Gizmodo wanted them to publicly acknowledge that they got the true scoop. That's extortion.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478066)

Me: Does this suitcase full of $20's with your name on it belong to you?
You: I'm not going to say.
Me: Okay, I'm keeping it until the owner claims it then.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (2, Insightful)

Joe U (443617) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478052)

"Gizmodo actually committed a felony."

Did someone get convicted that we don't know about, or do you commit libel as a hobby?

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (0, Flamebait)

Humus B. Chittenbee (1774042) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478238)

First of all - from Oregon statutes [which I know are NOT applicable here, but provide a reference point]:

" 164.045 Theft in the second degree. (1) A person commits the crime of theft in the second degree if:
(a) By means other than extortion, the person commits theft as defined in ORS 164.015; and
(b) The total value of the property in a single or aggregate transaction is $100 or more and less than $1,000.
(2) Theft in the second degree is a Class A misdemeanor."

and Theft by Extortion is defined as:

"164.075 Theft by extortion. (1) A person commits theft by extortion when the person compels or induces another to deliver property to the person or to a third person by instilling in the other a fear that, if the property is not so delivered, the actor or a third person will in the future: ...." and then provides 9 subsets - none of which apply to this case.

The thrust of my point here is that you appear to have hyperbolized the situation [as do many others], especially when one considers there is certainly an argument as to whether this is a theft at all [legally depending on intent.] As to the Gizmodo activities being unsavory? I would be hard pressed to disagree. In the end, this is Apple's dance and they can ask [or not] whomever they wish.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (0, Offtopic)

$1uck (710826) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477830)

Where as I agree with the main thrust of your comment. I disagree a lot with your assertion that Read Dead Redemption sucks. I didn't buy the game until I played my brother's copy, but it's pretty good and I'm fairly critical of video games. I've not enjoyed a single GTA game, I've played a few just not for very long I think they're boring/suck. I have played Bully and really enjoyed it. So I hope everyone reading the parent just doesn't assume that Read Dead Redemption sucks.

Re:I do not have a problem with this ... (1)

Protonk (599901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477918)

Slate isn't changing their tune due to pressure. Slate gets clicks by writing a story which is contrary to whatever prevailing wisdom is out there on any given subject--regardless of whether or not that contrary position is consistent with their past articles or has a shred of credibility regardless.

Enough with these Apple stories. (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477560)

Enough with these Apple stories. They aren't news. We don't care what devices their employees lost. We don't care about their conference. We don't care about who they're censoring.

Re:Enough with these Apple stories. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477690)

yes we do

Re:Enough with these Apple stories. (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477860)

Get an account, go to Preferences, Sections, block the Apple category and STFU.

Time for Steve to go again? (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477566)

I know steve jobs makes Apple a ton of money (and saved the company), but I'm not sure he's not evil. In the long run, his decisions (app store bans, gizmodo ban, safari extensions, iphone deal with the devil / tiered data plan) are going to hurt Apple.

Re:Time for Steve to go again? (2)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477862)

Really? I'm not sure why I'm replying to an AC, but really? You think that after the shit that Gizmodo pulled that Apple should invite them to WWDC, and that if they don't it's somehow going to hurt Apple? If you left an upper decker at my place I wouldn't invite you to any more parties either.

Re:Time for Steve to go again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478248)

Apple came up with the tiered data plan?

I mean, I'll agree with you that their partnership with AT&T is kind of idiotic, because AT&T sucks massive balls (though if they *had* to pick GSM or CDMA, I think GSM makes a lot more sense from a market perspective).

I don't see what Apple has to do with the tiered data plan though.

Oh Noes (-1, Troll)

Ethanol-fueled (1125189) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477570)

Okay, so Gizmodo misses out on the industry trade show equivalent of the pride parade. [scrapetv.com] So what?

Re:Oh Noes (5, Funny)

AnonymousClown (1788472) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477642)

Opportunity to screw with them?

The apparent snub has left the tech blog in a bit of a predicament—according to Editorial Director Brian Lam, Gizmodo is going to use the liveblogging of a number of other sources to construct its own, well, liveblog, of the WWDC keynote instead of its planned, "we're actually there" coverage.

All of the Gizmodo sources can start this concerted effort to make something up. Have one guy write that Steve showed up Naked. One the Steve had a pink faux turtle neck. Steve came out. Steve introduces the iWall for the very wealthy who want a touch screen wall for their internet a movie viewing pleasure..

This could be really fun!

Re:Oh Noes (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478016)

And Apple can then add libel to the Gizmodo editors' rap sheet, and seek injunctions to take down gizmodo.com, in addition to the criminal charges?

Re:Oh Noes (0, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478038)

Steve introduces the iWall for the very wealthy who want a touch screen wall for their internet a movie viewing pleasure..

You know that's completely unfeasible, but that's the kind of stuff that a company known for "thinking different" should be known for.

At the moment they seem to be at "think the exact same, but lock it down and stick a shiny logo and a larger price tag on it".

Re:Oh Noes (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478244)

Wow, the old "Apple is for gay people" joke.

The 1980's called. They want their humour back.

But congratulations on being a homophobic bigot - your parents must be so proud.

Um, and this is surprising, how ? (4, Insightful)

Space cowboy (13680) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477584)

I mean, it was quite clear from Steve's reaction during D8 that he regards it as having been stolen (and CA law would seem to agree, at least IMHO). Why the hell would he give free passes to the people who he thinks stole from his company ?

If Giz really wanted to get in, they could pay for a ticket like everyone else, if necessary getting someone not-so-in-the-news to buy it. Nothing Apple could do about that...

Simon

The coverup is always worse than the crime. (-1, Troll)

QuincyDurant (943157) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477704)

Denying press credentials to any legitimate news organization, which is Gizmodo sure as hell is, is rotten PR at the very least. Obama even talks to Fox.

This stuff happens when you leave things like secret prototypes lying around Starbucks; it's not the news media's fault that they write about it. It is by way of being their job.

Years ago, a California politician used whiteout to cover over the names of some campaign contributors whom they thought had better remain nameless. Then they copied their financial reports, kept the copies, and mailed the original whited-out version to the Fair Political Practices Commission. Shame on them. They got bad press.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (3, Insightful)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477754)

Coverup? Coverup would be if Apple invited no news outlets and kept everything hush and squelched any reporting which Apple has done in the past. I think the word you are looking for is "retribution".

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (4, Insightful)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477816)

Denying press credentials to any legitimate news organization, which is Gizmodo sure as hell is, is rotten PR at the very least.

I think that under the circumstances, the only bad PR Apple is going to receive over excluding Gizmodo is going to come from those sources that are always looking for bad things to say about the company no matter what. More rational people, even those who may not completely agree with Apple's decision, will at least understand where it's coming from.

As for Gizmodo being a legitimate news organization, well, that's debatable, isn't it? IMHO, legitimate news organizations do not pay for stories in the manner that Giz did, especially when it involves the purchase of stolen property. And, yes, according to California law, the iPhone prototype was stolen. I'm not even going to entertain any debate about that.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (4, Insightful)

Culture20 (968837) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478008)

IMHO, legitimate news organizations do not pay for stories in the manner that Giz did, especially when it involves the purchase of stolen property.

Sure they do. They even pay worse criminals and occasionally keep their identities secret from the authorities, preventing justice.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (0, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478116)

Are you some kind of fucking lawyer or something?

If not, shut the fuck up. You don't know whether or not it was stolen any more than anybody else.

Hell even if you are some kind of lawyer shut the fuck up.

So just shut the fuck up.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478204)

Gizmodo's publisher Gawker Media has a history of disrupting presentations according to the Wikipedia article about Gizmodo. They didn't have a spotless reputation to begin with. The iPhone prototype affair only confirmed what people were already thinking.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (2, Funny)

Low Ranked Craig (1327799) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477850)

I'm pretty sure Fox didn't steal Obama's Blackberry...

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478168)

Which is the single greatest token of respect they've shown for the office since it left Republican hands.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (1)

ceeam (39911) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477906)

You know, fuck PR. If Obama refused to "talk to Fox" I guess many people would approve.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (1)

Cheech Wizard (698728) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477956)

"Denying press credentials to any legitimate news organization, which is Gizmodo sure as hell is..." Yeah, and so is Faux News.... Gizmodo a legitimate news organization. Ha!

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (1)

Wyatt Earp (1029) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478042)

Fox hasn't committed any felonies against the Obama Administration though.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (1)

Wovel (964431) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478048)

Well to begin with this is a public event and Gizmodo was not denied the ability to buy a pass. Do you really think Apple should support an organization that knowingly stole from them and then laughed about it?

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (3, Insightful)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478050)

This stuff happens when you leave things like secret prototypes lying around Starbucks; it's not the news media's fault that they write about it. It is by way of being their job.

It's their fault they do not immediately return it or hand it over to authorities. Instead they chose to illegally dissect and did not return it. Their holding onto someone else's property for their own purposes is obviously criminal conversion, if they actually did that.

Losing press credentials should be the worst of their worries. After Apple is done with them, they will be lucky if Apple does not decide to pursue having gizmodo shut down over this.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478216)

Instead they chose to illegally dissect

Not just dissect. According to the affidavit, they also broke it in their half-assed attempt to put it back together. It mentions ground shorts among the damage, so it's likely that they effectively destroyed critical parts the phone.

After Apple is done with them

Not Apple! It looks like the DA is going after this, carefully but vigorously. Any civil suit will likely come after the criminal charges, which Apple has no part in.

Re:The coverup is always worse than the crime. (1)

coolgeek (140561) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478226)

Obviously, your definition of legit differs from mine. My definition excludes those who pay others to steal, misappropriate trade secrets and remove vowels from any comment on gizmodo that is critical of gizmodo.

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1)

gyrogeerloose (849181) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477710)

If Giz really wanted to get in, they could pay for a ticket like everyone else, if necessary getting someone not-so-in-the-news to buy it.

Good idea but, unfortunately for Gizmodo, tickets to the WWDC were sold out long before the iPhone prototype fiasco hit the Intertubes.

Nothing Apple could do about that...

I don't know this for sure but I suspect that admission to the WWDC involves the standard contract that's put on most event tickets. That usually includes a section stating that the event sponsor (Apple in this case) maintains the right to exclude anybody they choose after they refund the ticket price.

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477938)

WWDC 2010 was announced April 28th. It sold out 8 days later.

Gizmodo posted their iPhone story on April 19th. They also knew, from the iPad announcement, that they were no longer given press badges to Apple events. They had "bounties" for an iPad -- $10,000 for pictures/video, $100,000 if they could have one before the iPad event. Apple is within their rights to choose which press to give access to.

Gizmodo could have bought tickets to WWDC. It's pure speculation (not saying you're saying it, but others are) that Apple has banned them. Gizmodo just wanted a free handout. There are WWDC 2010 tickets on Craigslist. They've shown to have no problem paying for access.

Buy a ticket on Craigslist and wait in line like all the non-press. No big deal.

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478088)

Good idea but, unfortunately for Gizmodo, tickets to the WWDC were sold out long before the iPhone prototype fiasco hit the Intertubes.

It's called buying-the-tickets-from-a-scalper.

Assuming Gizomod is willing to pay enough, there's sure to be some WWDC attendee willing to give up their tickets, for some price.

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477738)

Not only that, they're the tossers that went around CES a couple of years ago turning off the display panels for a joke. They're a bunch of twats, we don't need yet another low level consumer electronic "tech blog", let Gawker fuck off and die.

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (4, Informative)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477786)

If Giz really wanted to get in, they could pay for a ticket like everyone else, if necessary getting someone not-so-in-the-news to buy it. Nothing Apple could do about that...

Apple could simply refuse to sell Giz the tickets. Even if Giz bought the tickets from someone else Apple could still deny them entrance to the event. By purchasing a ticket the buyer is implicitly agreeing to a whole phone-book worth of disclaimers, which usually includes the line "We reserve the right to remove you from the premise at any time without providing a reason.".

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1)

Protonk (599901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477888)

Apple could simply refuse to sell Giz the tickets. Even if Giz bought the tickets from someone else Apple could still deny them entrance to the event. By purchasing a ticket the buyer is implicitly agreeing to a whole phone-book worth of disclaimers, which usually includes the line "We reserve the right to remove you from the premise at any time without providing a reason.".

That's all hypothetical. Giz didn't buy a ticket, so we aren't talking about them being refused at the door, 7 thousand dollar ticket in hand. And generally, shouldn't we WANT press orgs. to pay for shit themselves instead of being given it?

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1)

mysidia (191772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478120)

Not when the press org is doing Apple a service by covering their conference, which translates into more profits.

Gizmodo may have done more damage to Apple via iPhone-theft-fiasco (at Gizmodo's own profit), than benefit they have to provide Apple by attending to WWDC though.

IOW, it may ordinarily make sense to give press free or discounted access, but Gizmodo tipped the balance against themselves (ultimately at Gizmo's own expense...

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1)

Joe U (443617) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477914)

Apple could simply refuse to sell Giz the tickets. Even if Giz bought the tickets from someone else Apple could still deny them entrance to the event. By purchasing a ticket the buyer is implicitly agreeing to a whole phone-book worth of disclaimers, which usually includes the line "We reserve the right to remove you from the premise at any time without providing a reason.".

Or they just pay someone going to the show to do their reporting as an independent.

Re:Um, and this is surprising, how ? (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478020)

True. But again Apple has full rights to kick that independent out if it's discovered that they are affiliated with Gizmodo.

It's obviously bad press, but just like being singled out for the Foxconn suicides there's nothing Apple can do about it.

Good (4, Interesting)

thetoadwarrior (1268702) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477588)

I don't care so much that they exposed Apple's new phone but the fact they so happily gave up the guy's name showing no journalistic integrity. Fuck 'em, ban them for years.

Gizmodo needs to grow up... (5, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477592)

Gizmodo has shown in the past that they are too immature [cnet.com] to be allowed attend these types of events.

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477676)

So journalists play a prank on another company so the company should be banned from a media event? By that logic we should outlaw Google for pulling their "We're now called Topeka" April Fools joke on MILLIONS of people.

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477814)

Er oops, you're a moron. Google is a company welcomed and hosted at an event like CES, not one there in a journalistic capacity with responsibilities to be respectful to the presenters there.

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (1)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477834)

Google's April Fools jokes didn't cause anyone financial harm (if it did then that someone would have already sued).

Disabling TVs during the unveiling demonstration in front of hundreds of reporters on the other hand...

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (2, Insightful)

coolgeek (140561) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478250)

Uh yeah, journalists are supposed to find facts and write about them. Not go to a venue to disrupt it. I think these guys are going to have a hard time proving they are journalists.

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (0, Troll)

mmaniaci (1200061) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477924)

From your linked article:

The CES organizers only grudgingly gave bloggers press credentials to the conference, and even then kept them segregated into a working lounge that was a step down in amenity and luxury from the "press" lounge and work area.

Its funny how people tend to act exactly the way you treat them. I don't think the prank was a good idea, but I sure as hell would lash out if I was the victim of segregation. And back on topic, Apple just made enemies out of Gizmodo for life. I don't care if you're wearing a black turtleneck during the middle of summer; pissing on the press is bad business.

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (2, Insightful)

QuietLagoon (813062) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478068)

Its funny how people tend to act exactly the way you treat them. I don't think the prank was a good idea...

.

It is also funny that people are treated based upon the way the act. Gizmodo, as you agree, acted poorly in the past, and has shown little evidence that they would be able to act maturely in the future.

I sure as hell would lash out if I was the victim of segregation.

There are mature ways to "lash out", and there are immature ways to "lash out". Gizmodo not only chose the latter, but also validated the reason for being treated differently.

Re:Gizmodo needs to grow up... (1)

turbotroll (1378271) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477996)

Gizmodo has shown in the past that they are too immature [cnet.com] to be allowed attend these types of events.

Not only Gizmodo, I could argue that the same goes for the whole Gawker network. Take a look, for instance, at Jalopnik, the automotive sibling of Gizmodo. It is written by a bunch of immature imbeciles.

Milk that bull (3, Insightful)

DeadJesusRodeo (1813846) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477598)

So ... Gizmodo can't provide news at the WWDC after obvious events previously, so they're plugging link-bait about their inability to provide news. And this is news - how? Why, it's Gizmodo news! But of course! (Get your news that's only news to Gizmodo, on Gizmodo!)

Re:Milk that bull (4, Insightful)

mmaniaci (1200061) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477950)

I read the article as news about Apple and Gizmodo, and it was brought to me by PCMag (through slashdot). Your reality distortion field must be turned up to 11 today.

Not a Gizmodo article (1)

forand (530402) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477966)

If you'll note the article is by PC Magazine which is not associated with gawker as far as I am aware. So how is this link-baiting? I certainly think it isn't news and there is HUGE difference between BANNING Gizmodo and not giving them a free pass with news credentials but I don't see how you are correct in your assertion that this is link-baiting.

Re:Milk that bull (1)

coolgeek (140561) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478260)

We're hoping if we feed this enough, gizmodo will actually eat itself.

Let's bear in mind that this is Gizmodo (5, Insightful)

Wuhao (471511) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477612)

This is the same outfit that thought it would be an amusing prank to show up at CES with a universal TV power-off remote, which they used to interrupt demonstrations, presentations and meetings. I wouldn't blame anyone for banning them from a trade show. Apple just has more specific reasons than most for barring them.

Re:Let's bear in mind that this is Gizmodo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477934)

This is the same outfit that thought it would be an amusing prank to show up at CES with a universal TV power-off remote, which they used to interrupt demonstrations, presentations and meetings.

I didn't believe this so I went looking [gizmodo.com] . Childish stuff for an organization that's supposedly fighting to get blogs the same treatment as "real" journalists.

Gotta wonder how many poor IT shlubs came close to losing employment because of this. (Though, if you're going to a tradeshow and don't cover the IR, you're asking for some trouble I guess...)

Re:Let's bear in mind that this is Gizmodo (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478082)

Gotta wonder how many poor IT shlubs came close to losing employment because of this. (Though, if you're going to a tradeshow and don't cover the IR, you're asking for some trouble I guess...)

Not enough.

You made your bed, now sleep in it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477662)

Seems to sum up the situation pretty well. >:)

Wow (2, Interesting)

Pluvius (734915) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477668)

Apple and Gizmodo really are playing this publicity stunt to the hilt. It's almost like notoriously anal-retentive Apple really was stupid enough to allow a top-secret prototype to be taken to a bar by some junior employee, and almost like Gizmodo really was stupid enough to purchase stolen property, report on it, and then tell everyone exactly how they got it. But everyone knows that could never have actually happened.

Right?

Rob

Re:Wow (2, Informative)

mulaz (1538147) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477866)

Nope...
There's no was Apple could do something like this [macobserver.com] ...

There's a reason I stopped reading Gawker Media (5, Interesting)

RyuuzakiTetsuya (195424) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477672)

There seems to be a real lack of editorial power at Gawker Media. Gawker itself is factually wrong rather often. Gizmodo has a real bad habit of doing things they just shouldn't be doing. Paying for play with the iPhone prototype was really disgraceful, then hiding behind being "journalists" as an excuse. The remote incident. Then there's Kotaku, which seems to be run by immature 18 year olds who have yet to touch a boob in their life before. Jalopnik can't keep their mouth shut about Top Gear spoilers. It's frustrating.

I'm through with the entire Gawker Media network. Engadget and Destructoid are much better blogs than Giz and Kotaku. Really haven't had a need for celeb gossip or car news, but when I do, it's not going to be Gawker.

Re:There's a reason I stopped reading Gawker Media (1)

Joe Tie. (567096) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478174)

For some reason I keep going back to io9 despite it sharing so many gawker family traits. It's a science fiction site with little apparent grasp of what science is, and one which seems to gasp with manic joy at every piece of low budget urban fantasy that pins the word "scifi" on itself. And the worst part is I don't even know why. It might just be the one or two contributers there who one just gets the impression of forced labor from. Like they know the score, know that we know, want to do actual reporting, but keep getting whipped by the gawker taskmasters.

It's Steve's party... (4, Insightful)

binaryspiral (784263) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477682)

If Gizmodo pissed in my Cherios - I wouldn't invite them to my party either.

Re:It's Steve's party... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477824)

While true it shows that instead of acting adult about it, Apple uhhh Steve is acting like a teenager. 'You dissed me at school so Im not inviting you to my party'.

This is a corporation to make money. Instead we are getting something akin to a psychotic teenager. Random changes to apple store. Random acts where things that were 'you must go this way, oh wait thats not cool anymore go this way'. License changes because some app pissed Jobs off that day.

Apple is way to schizoid to deal with. They wonder why they have very little inroad to the top 500 corps in the world? THATS WHY. No one can build any sort of business plan around Apple. Apple as a OEM partner is shitty as hell to deal with. I cant even plan six months out which way they are going to jump, and then leave me in the lurch with hundreds of 'supported' computers but no meaningful updates. They act like teenagers worried about what the next fickle thing is. Then bitch at you for not using their latest stuff. At least with MS I know I can open a support incident uhhh bribe them to fix things.

As a consumer electronics company they have fun and interesting products. But as a corp they are crazy bizarre to deal with.

Re:It's Steve's party... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478004)

Your post is pure and unadulterated hate bait.

Re:It's Steve's party... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478228)

"This is a corporation to make money. Instead"...

Wait. Are you trying to argue Apple is not making money? That they make less money for not inviting Gizmodo?

Like taking candy from a cripple... (4, Funny)

zill (1690130) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477984)

I haven't eaten Cheerios in years; can we please stick to the car analogies?

Heck, I'll start:

Steve Jobs left the keys in his Mercedes SL55 AMG [cultofmac.com] after parking it in the usual handicapped space. A Good Samaritan quickly discovered this abandoned vehicle and yelled out "Finders keepers!" before driving it straight home.

It then took more than a month of negotiations before Steve Jobs finally got his car back, but not before the Good Samaritan disassembled the vehicle and put it back together again.

Re:Like taking candy from a cripple... (1)

Protonk (599901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478218)

lolanalogypolice

Re:It's Steve's party... (1, Informative)

cffrost (885375) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478102)

If Gizmodo pissed in my [Cheerios] - I wouldn't invite them to my party either.

Enough- that's not what happened! His Holy Majesty (blessing be upon Him) left His iBox of Cheerios in Gizmodo's bathroom, and Gizmodo accidentally knocked them into the toilet while taking a Whizmodo. Facts, please!

Gizmodo comments (5, Interesting)

LinuxIsGarbage (1658307) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477700)

But don't dare criticize them for acting unprofessional, trying to milk the story, or otherwise disagree with them. They will ban or unstar you at a moment's notice.

Every fucking day they had an article summarizing the iPhone 4 coverage. Even if there was no actual new content. There were only ever two articles. The first one breaking the news, and then a second on where they showed a tear-down. But what do you expect from a firm that destroys presentations and displays at trade shows with TV-B-gone.

It's interesting how their tone changed. They used to sit around and wax and masturbate at great lengths about anything Apple. Now, not so much. Though it seems they all but forgot that computex was on this week.

I've pretty much abandoned them for Engadget.

Gizmodo is not Journalism (4, Insightful)

retech (1228598) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477708)

PLEASE never call these narcissistic twits journalists again. Journalism is based on research, fact finding, source checking and has a goal to keep a check and balance on the democratic process. Agreed, much of the media today fails this. But in a spectrum of "news" Gizmodo "stories" are on par with Bat Boy in the Enquirer. Their usage of the English language is barely a step above txt speak while their maturity is nowhere above that of a third grade child.

Re:Gizmodo is not Journalism (0)

welcher (850511) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477976)

Yeah, they probably write things like "usage of the language" rather than "use of the language." Terrible.

Re:Gizmodo is not Journalism (1)

Bing Tsher E (943915) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478170)

Journalism is based on research, fact finding...

Journalism is based on flunking out of calculus, so you try to get into the English department, but they won't let you. So you apply to enter J-school instead. As long as you get a passing grade in SelfRighteous 1-001 they let you in.

iPhone Special Master's Identity to be Kept Secret (0, Offtopic)

theodp (442580) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477722)

CNET News [cnet.com] : According to Wagstaffe, a special master is an unpaid agent appointed by the court to make sure judicial orders are followed. Special masters are typically volunteers, mostly former judges or law professors, Wagstaffe said. They are supposed to be unconnected to the cases they are working on. Wagstaffe said he was under court orders not to reveal the identity of the special master reviewing Chen's possessions.

Protest with coverage? (1, Insightful)

theCoder (23772) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477736)

Why do media sites always complain about Apple, then proceed to give them so much free advertising? Every time Apple releases a new product, the media falls over themselves to tell everyone about it. If they wanted to teach Apple a lesson, they'd impose their own ban on Apple news. No free product placement on the front page. No glowing "reviews" about how great the new iWhatever is and how you just have to have one.

Of course, that would imply intelligence in the media, and so far there's been very little evidence of that.

(that, and as others have noted, Gizmodo isn't exactly above reproach in many ways)

Jobs is the largest shareholder of Disney (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477942)

look it up.

Re:Protest with coverage? (1)

mmaniaci (1200061) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477988)

Haha, very true. I don't understand why the media and consumers are so in love with Apple. Loving Apple is like asking stranger to marry after he/she just raped you.

Mr. T's words of Wisdom: (1)

fuzzyfuzzyfungus (1223518) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477774)

"I pity the fool who messes with Mr. Steve."

WTF Apple (0, Troll)

MacGyver2210 (1053110) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477778)

HEIL APPLE!

That's seriously what it's coming down to. Apple is going to drive away so many people with their closed-minded situation. Can they not see this? Can they not see the global trend toward free and open? Or do they just not care for the sake of profit and propriety?

I'm done with them. Go to hell Jobs. Take that shitty King Sized iPhone-sans-phone with you.

Re:WTF Apple (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478162)

If Gizmodo wants to go, they can buy a ticket. No one is stopping them.

You really expect Apple to give them a ticket for free (which is what this story is about - and it's not even a confirmed denial, Apple just hasn't go back to them, so it;s either ignoring or busy etc, not a confirmed no) after the entire iPhone prototype fiasco?

Mm.

Remind me to invite the guy who stole my last car to my party celebrating the purchase of my new car so he can drink my beer and eat my food all at my expense.

I have a simple (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477820)

solution. Fuck Steve. Fuck Apple. If there is one thing I cannot stand I'ts the "Hey you are locked into our world" arrogant ass headed ignorance these fucking snake oil picklefucks ram down the throat of the stupid. It gets old. I don't know about normal people since I rarely see any on the /dot. /end fucking rant

More evidence of Apple "openness" (1)

Jackie_Chan_Fan (730745) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477848)

Apple, they will format your life.

They are welcome (5, Insightful)

Protonk (599901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477868)

They are welcome, they just don't get their tickets gratis. If they bought a ticket they would be at the keynote. You can construct whatever narrative you like. Either this is apple imposing their iron fist on dissent or this is Gizmodo getting their comeuppance for buying stolen property and attempting to extort apple for it. In both cases apple (presumably) has the right to refuse to extend a welcome to a press organization. That may be unseemly, but it is true.

I don't think either party comes out looking good, but Gizmodo is really milking it. You bought a leaked phone, attempted to get confirmation that the phone was real to get a scoop, and you got burnt. Oh well. that shit happens. If you don't want to get burnt, don't play with fire. This isn't the pentagon or the white house, where some public service is gained through continued access by all parties--Apple is not a government agency. They are a private company. We may feel (As I do) that Apple SHOULD allow press to attend regardless of their orientation, but apple is under no mandate to do so. If we feel strongly enough, we should refuse to buy the products and/or own the stock on the basis of our reservations. Beyond that, we don't have much sway.

Gizmodo Alternative? (1)

Haffner (1349071) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477910)

As someone who is tired of Gizmodo's general behavior and attitude, but enjoys the spectrum of coverage they provide, what would be a viable alternative tech blog to read? I mainly read giz, slashdot, and ars.

Re:Gizmodo Alternative? (1)

Protonk (599901) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477932)

engadget? Or just drop Giz from the rotation. You can also just add some slow burner single issue sites to your RSS feed. way I see it is that Giz (and sites like Giz) provide 3 kinds of coverage: detailed coverage on subjects everyone and their mother are after (new product launches), rehashes of general comments or rumors floating around, and rare scoops like the iphone business. the first two can come from anywhere and when the third pops up, you won't need to read giz regularly to know about it.

Re:Gizmodo Alternative? (1)

Game_Ender (815505) | more than 4 years ago | (#32477978)

Engadget. It's the classier, more popular version of Gizmodo.

[Shrug] They've already seen the product (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32477986)

What's for them to see? They already got their scoop, right?

And if there is anything new announced there that they miss, well, I guess they'll just have to echo conventional sources that have enough journalistic integrity not to deal in stolen goods and not to reveal their source's identity (failure to make best effort to return misplaced property, such as returning the item to the bar in question where it was lost == stolen, and they knew that or should have consulted with their lawyer about it).

Apple could do them the courtesy of sending them a PFO letter, but that would be the limit I'd feel obliged to give them if I was Apple. Oh, and I might add an "Apply next year and we'll consider it."

Oh come on (1)

sjvn (11568) | more than 4 years ago | (#32478070)

And this is news why?

They'll be welcome again at another Apple shindig when Steve Jobs is dead and buried.

And, probably not then.

Steven

Don't FUCK WITH ME !! I AM THE JOBS !!!! (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478146)

I am the JOBS !!! Don't FUCK WITH ME !! FUCK WITH ME AND I WILL CRACK LIKE THE TOOTHPICK I HAVE BECOME !!!!

In reply to (what the fuck is a gizmodo anyways):
Rafael Nadal Just Won the French Open Wearing This $525,000 Wristwatch
Congratulations to Rafael Nadal, whose dominance on Roland Garros clay was reaffirmed today following his French Open victory over Swede Robin Söderling. The victory is sweet, to be sure, but so was the bling he wore on his wrist.

I agree, but hope Apple shows sense of humour (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#32478152)

I agree with the ban. However, I do hope Apple shows a sense of humour by bringing out that guy who lost the phone (Gray Powell? was that his name?) Have him come out and say a couple lines about losing something. Then Jobs can come in and say, hey, I think this is yours? Then a rimshot, chuckles and everyone can line up to blow Jobs.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>