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.
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.
And with the crackdown on fake/paid/influenced reviews, shills and other similar stuff seems the society is waking up.
While I strongly condemn limiting the freedom of speech I do think that there should be detailed disclosures on what kind of stuff the person doing the review is getting. And yes early access should be on that list.
Transparency is a potent tool.
So, this doesn't really surprise me.
[1]http://www.zdnet.com/blog/apple/apple-prs-dirty-little-secre... [2]http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_contro...
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.
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.
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.'
The article could have been written without the extremes of prior examples.
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.
The construction industry has been doing this for decades in the UK and I bet companies like walmart do it in the USA as well.
If you dont see the problem you need to read up on the industrial history of the USA
That doesn't neccesarily mean they maintain a blacklist or whatever. But 'that much thought'? Certainly. Of course they do. It's bizarre to suggest that they don't spend 'that much thought' on PR.
Techniques to control public image over social networks are getting more and more attention. For example academic papers here: [1].
Of course I don't know about Apple in particular, but really doubt that they don't look into this "just because".
The article wasn't talking about a conspiracy, read it again. It's just what you said, Apple doing PR control.
If they think that criticisng Apple or its products makes someone a bad journalist or unfair and they are blacklisted, then in actuality they do care a lot about journalists.
A tech journalist is at a disadvantage with the rest if he is denied early access to products, and he won't get that unless he writes pretty things about Apple. We have a word for that: blackmail.
Dunno about the author, but me? Absolutely, yes.
Not just Apple either. Probably every large business with a half functioning marketing and PR operation.
Quite right as well. Its their job. Present the product in the best light possible to maximize profits of the owners or share holders. That is the purpose of business.
I make no moral judgement. Its just raw capitalism. The trick is to know this and to never accept a single source, then make a judgement.
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?
> […]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?
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.
