
How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press - vilgax
http://www.cultofmac.com/255618/how-apples-blacklist-manipulates-the-press/
======
stevebennso
Is this a problem? If you write articles saying that you don't like me, I
probably won't send you any free stuff or invite you round to my house.
They're a consumer electronics and software company, not a government
department. If they don't want to talk to you or send you any free stuff,
that's up to them and I'm 100% fine with that.

Why do you need to visit them or get free equipment from them to write
articles anyway? Wait for it to be released to the public like everyone else.

~~~
mansr
Public perception is influenced by the first reviews published on a new
product. If you give a few known friendly writers early access, there will be
a few days of nothing but positive reporting. Mainstream media will then pick
this up as "overwhelmingly positive" response to the new thing.

Of course Apple has the right to behave like this. Nevertheless, it's good for
consumers to know that the early reviews are carefully shaped, so if you want
a balanced picture, you need to wait until after the public release.

~~~
nknighthb
Uh, who exactly doesn't realize all companies try to control press coverage?
Controlling perceptions is the concise version of a PR job description.

~~~
deathcakes
This, exactly. Not really sure why this is such a revelation.

------
neya
Apple has a long history of manipulating the press in other ways too.[1][2]

So, this doesn't really surprise me.

[1][http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-
secre...](http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-secret/12291)
[2][http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_contro...](http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_controlled_leaks/)

~~~
coldtea
Controlled leaks and a blacklist. Isn't this what EVERY company on earth does?

Also: it's not a blacklist as he describes it. It's a WHITE-list, since there
are people (like Grubber or Pogue I guess) that get stuff earlier.

It's not like Apple people give interviews etc to anyone -- so it's not like
there's a blacklist of people not getting access.

There's just a whitelist of people having early access. I've seen this from
MS, Adobe, Google, Canon and generally tons of other companies.

------
schrototo
He's putting himself on my blacklist by using OnSwipe. How is that shit not
dead yet?

~~~
chrismonsanto
What is OnSwipe and why is it so bad? Never heard of it until now. I'm not
even sure what it is from the front page of their website.

~~~
nknighthb
A shitty, laggy, memory-eating UI for mobile/touchscreen devices that people
who have absolutely never used a tablet put on their websites thinking it
makes them cool. In reality, it is a sort of reverse-DDoS on mobile web users.

I assume it's really a secret plot by Microsoft to make the mobile web
unusable and drive everybody back to PCs where they're still semi-competitive.

~~~
tptacek
Ok, now, can someone demonstrate some insight and/or thoughtfulness by
explaining what OnSwipe is _supposed to be_? Their offices are next door to
ours at Union Square, and the people that work there do not appear to be
assholes hell-bent on ruining your mobile browsing experience.

I'm not sticking up for OnSwipe, but this litany of "OnSwipe is evil" has
become something of a religious ritual on HN, and for once I'd like to see if
we can do better than a mindless chant.

What do we think the people who work at OnSwipe are setting out to do?

~~~
nknighthb
Your question is mindless. We all know what OnSwipe is _supposed_ to be. It's
sufficiently obvious as to need no explanation.

If you care that much about getting deeper insight into how yet another
horrible, misguided product came to foul the market with its stench, why don't
you walk next door and investigate instead of doing your old man yells at
clouds routine? You're obviously both better-equipped and better-motivated
than the rest of us to get answers. If that's not enough to make you do it,
don't expect anyone else to do it for you.

~~~
sillysaurus2
Why be an asshole? Write your comments for the readers of HN, not for whomever
you're replying to.

I have no idea what OnSwipe is supposed to be. It's not obvious at all.

~~~
nknighthb
> _Why be an asshole?_

In my opinion, I am not an asshole, but at least one other person in this
thread certainly is. Why ask this question? Has my answer contributed anything
of value? Were you expecting it to?

> _Write your comments for the readers of HN, not for whomever you 're
> replying to._

Do as you say, not as you do?

> _I have no idea what OnSwipe is supposed to be. It 's not obvious at all._

It's a UI for mobile/touchscreen devices. I even stated as much in my original
comment, and I reject the notion that it is non-obvious.

Every time you encounter a crappy example of a product category, do you ask
what the product is _supposed_ to be? What answer are you even expecting?
"This is really bad spaghetti." "OK, but what is it supposed to be?"... Wat?

~~~
tptacek
What does it mean to be a "UI for mobile/touchscreen devices"? Mobile devices
already have UIs. What is it trying to add to those? It's obviously trying to
add _something_ , unless you literally believe the developers that go to work
in that office are setting out to make your life worse.

~~~
statictype
It's certainly _trying_ to add something of value - the problem everyone seems
to have is that it's failing at that task pretty badly. And not in the sense
that the developers are incompetent or lack skill - but in the sense that what
they think is a better UI experience is very definitely not an opinion shared
by others.

This is further aggravated by the fact that many site owners choose to use
them.

------
pg
In every field there are dishonest people you want to avoid dealing with. So
I'm sure every company more than about a year or two old has encountered
reporters they'd never want to talk to again, beyond things like press
releases that go to everyone.

~~~
FireBeyond
There's a bit more to it than that. Apple blacklists reporters and
publications that are -critical-, not (just) dishonest.

------
Bulkington
Trade journo here (not tech). No need for blacklists in some/many/most
segments. Upset corp. hatchetman calls publisher, says either the offending
reporter goes or our ads do. I haven't seen a whole lot of publishing
backbone/pushback out here lately. (Not that that's changed much.)

Flipside is fancy junketeering, with publishers letting corporations host
journos for new product events or 'market updates' held in resort
destinations. That's the list journos want to be on, 'but it doesn't impact
our objectivity.'

------
ryguytilidie
I was with him on the "blacklisting people in the press is bad" thing. When he
started comparing it to the red scare you really have to worry about his
connection to reality.

~~~
chadwickthebold
Further down... "It needs to be said, of course, that comparisons between,
say, McCarthyism and Apple’s PR strategy are absurd. I make them here only to
illustrate the history and purpose of blacklisting."

~~~
jmspring
"It needs to be said..." After spending several paragraphs mentioning the most
egregious black list example in US history. Sorry, but "this is just an
illustration" is just a cop out given the example was there to set a
particular tone.

The article could have been written without the extremes of prior examples.

~~~
vinceguidry
The longer you read the article, the further and further he gets from accusing
Apple of anything, really. He's quick to point out that the blacklist tactic
shouldn't affect how you see the tech press. Towards the end he admits that
the difference between a whitelisted journalist and a blacklisted one is
practically nil.

Read between the lines and you see it's just a matter of status and pride. You
get one kind by being on the blacklist and another by being on the whitelist.
The author is clear which side he'd rather be on.

And that's the real point of the article. To show off how 'independent' he is
by daring to compare Apple to Joseph McCarthy.

~~~
jmspring
I caught a bit of the same, it felt like the introductory paragraphs were
really meant for sensationalism and to create some buzz, which probably
worked.

------
leoc
I remember Engadget being "asked" to stop covering jailbreak-requiring iPhone
apps.

------
dxm
Gosh. If I could laugh I would have been doubled over. Does the author really
think that Apple put this much thought into not letting certain journalists
into new coverage. This is pretty much a thought of a conspiracy theorist,
Apple surely doesn't think about communist conspiracies from the 1940s, they
merely think you're either a bad journalist or one who is consistently unfair.
The detail in which the linked article puts forth is ridiculous. It's over-
analysis at it's most laughable.

~~~
dmethvin
If you know anything about big companies and PR, you would know that much of
what he says is true. They do indeed monitor what various media outlets say
and create an "enemies list" that will be starved.

Even big and influential media may not escape. Apple doesn't need to cooperate
with the normal reporters on the New York Times who ask hard questions about
conditions in Chinese factories, they just need to court David Pogue.

------
foobarqux
Now consider how the government does the same thing to the press and how it
affects political coverage especially the notion that the media is a check on
power.

------
mstolpm
Having working with PR departments of various companies, almost all had some
sort of blacklisting/whitelisting for journalists and media outlets. Seems to
be perfectly normal because the job of those departments is to influence media
coverage to be positive and widespread. Working with some journalists is more
effective than working with others and some have proven in the past to not be
worth spending time (and money) on.

Mike Elgan concludes: "Ultimately, it’s not that big of a deal." True, but
then readers should ask: Why is he writing a big column singling out Apple for
this behavior? Eyeballs?

~~~
Semaphor
In general:

> […]you should know about it so you can be a better-informed media “consumer”
> and consumer electronics customer.

Why he is singling out Apple, my guess would be because it's an Apple news
site?

------
k-mcgrady
>> "If wasn’t on Apple’s “blacklist” already, this post would surely get me on
it. It’s totally worth it."

Really? You make money writing about Apple and you think it would be worth it
to intentionally piss them off and get blacklisted? I can understand writing a
bad article about a bad product and getting blacklisted because you don't want
to lie in a review but a conspiracy piece that also mentions how the Chinese
government jails journalists makes you look worse than Apple. If I was in
charge of giving out invites to journalists at Apple I'd exclude you, not
because you wrote something negative, but because you wrote something really
over the top and pretty crazy.

------
enscr
What list is MG Siegler on?

~~~
leoc
One of the linked articles [http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/16/apple-
public-relation...](http://tech.fortune.cnn.com/2012/02/16/apple-public-
relations-new-media-pecking-order/) suggests he's on the team, or at least was
last year.

------
mbennett
Reminds me of when CNET was blacklisted by Google for publishing Schmidt's
personal info that was available on Google searches after he downplayed
privacy.

[http://boingboing.net/2009/12/09/google-ceo-says-
priv.html](http://boingboing.net/2009/12/09/google-ceo-says-priv.html)

------
byteofprash
'He who controls the past controls the future. He who controls the present
controls the past.' \- George Orwell.

