

Apple’s Free Ride: Why Journalists Treat Product Launches Like News - techn9ne
http://observer.com/2012/09/apples-free-ride-why-journalists-treat-product-launches-like-news/

======
Mystalic
Ryan's a smart guy, but he has got this one wrong.

Product launches ARE news, no matter how you slice it. News is simply a
product of what people want to know about, plus what people SHOULD know about.

So people want to know about new Apple products. So the news media delivers.

But they also SHOULD know about things like the failure of iOS 6 maps, which
has been roundly slammed by the media. If the media were truly in bed with
Apple, would it be writing this kind of negative portrayal?

Is there symbiotic relationship between the marketing departments of companies
and journalists? Absolutely. Do journalists give them free passes? Hell no.

~~~
ryanholiday
The product itself can at times be news--especially if it is a major
technological advancement. What is NOT news is the "event," the perfectly
choreographed dance between the corporation and the media, where the company
manufactures fanfare and urgency and theater around the launch and the media
turns it into reality by writing about it.

Many news staples fall into this category from movie premieres to press
releases to anniversaries to deliberate "leaks."

------
pserwylo
There is a show run by the government broadcaster in Australia called
Mediawatch. It does just that, keeps watch on the news organisations to
highlight when they are acting inappropriately.

They did a short segment on the launch of the new iPad this year [0] in which
they echoed the sentiments of this article. They were especially critical of
the excessive coverage given by the government broadcaster themselves, which
is supposed to be particularly careful when it comes to even mentioning brand
names in most other contexts (e.g. They never use the sponsors names when
referring to sporting stadiums):

"Why on earth, we wondered, did ABC News Breakfast spend nine minutes in all
on a bunch of techheads queuing outside a shop with a piece of fruit on it, to
buy a marginally updated product that they could have got anywhere?"

[0] www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/transcripts/s3464157.htm (the video and
transcript are both here).

------
KirinDave
I read it. The whole article. And all I can think after digesting what I read
is, "U mad?" I think this journalist is just irritated that someone scolded
them for "working the news cycle."

And it's not clear why saying, "Well Apple's events are also over covered!" is
somehow a dodge for "The RNC is being massively overcovered."

P.S., If anything CES is undercovered. In the 10 years I've been following it
I've never once felt like I have any clue what is going on there.

~~~
wpietri
You didn't read it very well.

A) he's not a journalist. B) He's saying that however much the convention
coverage is a problem, tech journalism is a bigger mess. C) His point is
pretty clear: journalism purports to be reporters working for readers, but
that is no longer the case.

~~~
KirinDave
A) Seems like he is. B) And I am saying that is faulty logic. C) I am not sure
this is entirely true. But it's a different conversation than the one being
had here.

------
maxharris
This article is wrong. I am always interested in hearing about Apple's
products because they are so incredibly good, and the new features often have
a dramatic impact on my life.

The 2007 iPhone introduction showed me what my future phone would look like.
The latest LTE feature on iPhone 5? Awesome because it means I won't have to
hunt around for wifi once it becomes widespread.

To sum it up, people care about these announcements because the company that
makes them actually delivers (and they do it in style).

~~~
wpietri
Is there somewhere in the article where he said that Max Harris doesn't want
to read about Apple products? Otherwise, I'm not sure how your particular
interest proves the article wrong.

------
techtalsky
"Journalism is printing what someone else does not want printed: everything
else is public relations." -- George Orwell

~~~
rbanffy
Well... There are many phone makers who would be happy if the iPhone 5 got
less press coverage.

------
jkubicek
If there was one Android phone released every year, it would get at least as
much coverage as the release of the iPhone.

------
marze
Polls say 1 in 5 in the US plan to get the new iPhone.

Its release certainly is news if that is the case.

~~~
jkn
True, but the article makes the point that the causality doesn't go only one
way.

~~~
netcan
Maybe so, but from the perspective of a single writer or publication that's
just a why.

------
trotsky
The advertising buys are misleading, as Apple doesn't include (or directly
disclose afaik) the money spent on their paid placements, which anyone who
watches western media knows is quite substantial.

~~~
ryanholiday
I think that only proves my point more:
[http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-
ot...](http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-05-10/apple-the-other-cult-
in-hollywood)

~~~
trotsky
Is that accurate that they never pay? I thought they refused to discuss it. I
didn't mean to suggest that it refuted your point either way though, as I
generally agree.

------
forgottenpaswrd
Good for a company if they don't need to spend in advertising. For me, in an
ideal world word of mouth if the product is good should be enough.

Apple master the process of creating expectations and surprising people, in
their staged announcements, good for them.

Why the hate? envy?

~~~
ryanholiday
It's not hate. If I ran Apple, I'd be doing the same thing. But JOURNALISTS
are not supposed to carry water for business--let alone a multi-billion dollar
corporation that could more than afford to get these messages out another way.
What is Apple announcing at these events? New products they are selling.
That's "news" under only the saddest of definitions.*

There are some great books written about this, namely Daniel Boorstin's The
Image <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_event>

------
ahallerberg
Ridiculous metaphors FTW: "You know, the twice or often thrice yearly events
that bring everyone out to Cupertino, where they stand in line and contribute
a few licks to the collective rim job the press loves to give Apple."

------
rwc
I'm deeply suspicious of this article, because it could have been written and
published any time over the past several years, but Holiday chose today. My
cynical impression is that he's just riding the wave of iPhone news and using
a sensational headline to drive traffic. Oh, and what's this?

"Ryan Holiday is the bestselling author of Trust Me I’m Lying: Confessions of
a Media Manipulator and a PR strategist for brands and writers."

It seems ironic to me that someone would lambast Apple for getting a free ride
in the media, only to end the article with an advertisement of his own.

------
notatoad
It's hardly a free ride. Sure, journalists pay more attention to apple than
they maybe deserve, but that's not because journalists have some great apple
bias. it's because the apple PR department works their asses off to cater to
journalists and make their product launches media friendly events. They
deliver their product in easily reportable chunks, and they craft a public
image so that news about apple is what the media's customers want to read
about.

------
morgannnn
"Apple’s marketing strategy these days is essentially 'hold off on the
advertising, just sit back and let the media go hog wild.'"

What a joke.

~~~
longarm
In what way?

~~~
radley
Apple does gain from the release events, but they have a huge advertising
budget and run some of the largest known campaigns.

~~~
longarm
Huge only in the sense that a billion dollars is a lot regular people...Apple
spends a fraction of what its competitors spend. Plus up until 2011 I think
they spent about half of what they spend now.

~~~
saurik
Apple spends less than Microsoft, but it is almost entirely on a single
product (the iPhone). Product for product, Apple's marketing budget is
immensely larger than other similar companies.

~~~
longarm
And the iPhone is a bigger business than ALL of Microsoft's offerings combined

Per Vanity Fair:

"Exhibit A: today the iPhone brings in more revenue than the entirety of
Microsoft.

No, really.

One Apple product, something that didn’t exist five years ago, has higher
sales than everything Microsoft has to offer. More than Windows, Office, Xbox,
Bing, Windows Phone, and every other product that Microsoft has created since
1975. In the quarter ended March 31, 2012, iPhone had sales of $22.7 billion;
Microsoft Corporation, $17.4 billion."

[http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2012/08/microsoft-lost-
mo...](http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2012/08/microsoft-lost-mojo-steve-
ballmer)

~~~
saurik
FWIW, because of your comment about "before 2011", I was purposely looking at
data from 2008, to help control for that (when the iPhone wasn't yet that
popular as the original device kind of sucked; the 3G had just come out,
however, as had the App Store, so things were already on an uptick).

Looking at data from 2007, it seems like Apple was spending a third what
Microsoft was on marketing, and had half the revenue; arguably then, Apple was
spending 33% less than Microsoft on advertising per revenue, not really "a
fraction".

However, you seem to be correct about now: I pulled some 10Q's from this year,
and it seems Microsoft is spending $3.4b/Q for $17b/Q in sales ($6b/Q profit)
while Apple is spending Apple is spending peanuts (although I honestly
couldn't find the data I needed to verify this from the 10Q) for about $35b/Q
in sales ($9b/Q profit).

While looking into that further (as I was especially bothered that I couldn't
find the exact advertising numbers), I then came across this article, which
looks at yearly data and comes to the same conclusion.

[http://www.forbes.com/sites/ycharts/2012/08/02/who-spends-
mo...](http://www.forbes.com/sites/ycharts/2012/08/02/who-spends-more-on-ads-
apple-or-microsoft-another-lesson-in-quality-vs-quantity/)

------
joejohnson
"The media, when it’s functioning properly, should protect the public from
marketers and their ceaseless attempts to trick people into buying things."

This may be true, but had media ever "functioned properly?". Nearly every
media outlet generates far more revenue from advertising than from
viewership/subscriptions. So of course the media is beholden to the marketers.

------
logn
Apple masterfully plays the media with every product. The secrecy they keep
before a launch leads to tons of articles speculating about features and
reporting leaks. I agree with the author that it's all just a big infomercial.

I used to be a big Google News readers, but about a third of their Tech
section is devoted to Apple, so I've gone to other sources.

------
joelrunyon
I'm really surprised Ryan Holiday made it on HN.

He's intentionally controversial - that's his strategy.

------
lmkg
Because they get page views. And page views keep the lights on, through
advertising.

------
zerostar07
There's two sides to this relationship: the media know apple sells as well, so
they do their best to keep them prominent.

That said, the iMania can go too far at times: Today on the BBC news website
(even right now), first item is "19 people killed in pakistan protests", 2nd
item "Apple says map app will improve". I understand that first world problems
have their share, but we 're talking about a very small part of the population
that will actually care about either maps issues or the people who are
affected by them.

------
jim_kaiser
It's heartening to see that the HN responses echo my sentiment. Also..

"Democrats or Republicans look too rehearsed on stage? Let’s pounce. Apple?
Let’s sweep it under the rug."

Look too rehearsed? When presenting a demo to a client, managing an "Apple
like" demo is the holy grail. Although, you could expect a political candidate
to partly be "too rehearsed" and still be his real self (or his other pretend
self) on stage.

------
frankosaurus
Not that anyone reads newspapers anymore, but my local paper (San Jose Mercury
News) is definitely guilty of this. Nearly every Apple product launch is front
page news, and almost always glowingly positive. Other valley companies? Not
so much.

------
Karunamon
A product launch _is_ news, especially when it's something as absurdly popular
as the iPhone. People lining up for days in advance, that kind of thing, is
newsworthy, regardless of how you feel about the news cycle and advertising.

------
paul9290
It's obvious people go crazy for anything new Apple launches thus you as a
blogger would be foolish to not write about it... Further it's obviously
newsworthy.

Apple brought forth the smartphone revolution ( nailed the execution and
others since copied). Also they have created other things like Siri (others
copied their execution too). Thus it's no surprise millions are extremely
interested in what new tech they'll be releasing.

For me though the iPhone 5 isn't too exciting... Nothing revolutionary or
profound. Personally i was hoping they'd add a QR scanner to the built in
camera.

~~~
jaredsohn
Apple did not create Siri; it was an acquisition. However, Apple should get
credit for bringing it to a wide audience.

------
holograham
news corporations are just a proxy for what the public wants to know about.
The news consumers (aka the market) dictate the type of news publishers
report. Obviously we currently put a higher premium on covering apple launches
and political conventions. If people did not want that, they wouldn't pay
attention to those news outlets and subsequently those news outlets would
either go under or change their coverage trends.

~~~
ryanholiday
This is a preposterously naive understanding of how the news business works.
Customers dictate what gets produced--no question--but so do a variety of
other market factors. Namely, what is cheap and easy to produce for
publishers. In the case of Apple news, these factors create a wicked cycle.
Users click on shiny gadget stories and the news doubles down on such content
because it's a lot easier and a hell of a lot cheaper to send a reporter to
Cupertino than it is to send them to Baghdad.

ALL news can be made to be interesting and exciting. The problem is that the
pay-per-pageview model heavily incentivizes blogs to grab low hanging fruit
instead of doing the real (and often expensive) work of making the important
news readable.

~~~
holograham
I disagree somewhat. It is true that certain news can be prohibitively
expensive and/or completely barred by the country or another country however
for the most part news that people care about enough to purchase and read will
be obtained by a news publisher of some sort. We have already seen different
business models develop to deliver news that would have been too costly to
hire a team of dedicated reporters (e.g. Huffington Post). The fundamental
rule of a free market _should_ make news outlets proxy's for the consumers
interests. This site in particular hosts numerous ideas where the current
offerings do not match the consumers needs (sometimes due to market
inefficiencies, sometimes due to new tech, sometimes due to new business
paradigms that circumvent current legal/political impediments, etc). If the
news industry is delivering news that is a hybrid of what the public wants and
what is cheapest to report then inevitably there will be a business model that
will spring up to deliver a better solution that optimizes for what people
want and delivers it in a cost effective way.

