Tweet
Is Apple The New Microsoft?
Lisa DiCarlo, 03.04.05, 2:55 PM ET
Steven P. Jobs
NEW YORK - It's ironic that a company as innovative as Apple Computer could have such a regressive view of the changing world of American media.
The company, led by Chief Executive Steve Jobs, won a round in its quest to force three Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people )-enthusiast Web sites to disclose their sources on articles they published regarding unannounced Apple products. In court filings the company argued that the Web sites were not protected by free speech because they are not legitimate members of the press.
The ruling, if it stands, will have a chilling and potentially devastating effect on not only blogs, which are growing in stature and prominence, but online media in general.
This potential threat to first amendment rights and Apple's crackdown on Web sites that, in general, love the company and its products, do nothing to bolster Apple's image. In fact, the company's success of late has yielded accusations of bullying and potentially unlawful business tactics, not to mention complaints that songs purchased from its iTunes music service, the dominant digital music store, don't work with music players other than its own. To some, that might sound like its neighbor to the north.
Apple argues that Web sites aren't protected by free speech provisions under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because they are not "legitimate members of the press." In most cases journalists, protected under the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech, do not have to reveal sources.
Problem is, the definition of journalism is rapidly changing. "Traditional" media like print newspapers, broadcast news and weekly magazines years ago began being augmented and in some cases supplanted by "new" media on the Web.
More recently blogs, or personal Web logs written by anybody with something to say, burst onto the scene and began changing the journalism landscape.
For the first time bloggers were awarded press credentials to the 2004 presidential conventions. Some of the more well-known bloggers have become fixtures on cable news channels. Bloggers have broken several major political stories, scooping the "legitimate" media. Today many portals and traditional news outlets are incorporating user-generated content and so-called citizen journalism into the mix.
The New York Times Co. (nyse: NYT - news - people ) for example, recently paid more than $400 million for uber-blog About.com.
If Apple prevails, does that mean that well-respected and award winning online-only publications like Salon and Slate, now owned by the Washington Post Company (nyse: WPO - news - people ) and CNet (nasdaq: CNET - news - people ) will not be protected under free speech? It's a slippery slope.
As we noted last month (see: "Stopping The Presses") the news landscape is increasingly dominated by nontraditional publishers like Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) Time Warner's (nyse: TWX - news - people ), Microsoft's (nyse: MSFT - news - people ) MSN and Yahoo! (nasdaq: YHOO - news - people ).
Today Susquehanna Financial Group issued an eight-page report on Yahoo's move into blogs and user-generated content, noting that blog readership grew 58% in 2004 and that blogs are "dramatically changing the availability of information on the Web."
Apple doesn't see this?
Dan Gillmor, the former San Jose Mercury News tech columnist, has started a project called Grassroots Media which, according to its Web site, is intended to encourage and enable more citizen-based media.
In a recent post he notes that, "If the party leaking information to Think Secret [one of the sites being sued] had sent it to, say, the San Jose Mercury News or The New York Times, and had those publications ran the news, Apple wouldn't be suing them."
And what is a legitimate member of the press anyway? Certainly being correct all the time does not qualify one to be "legitimized" by a media outlet. The scandals at The Times, USA Today and CBS News, a unit of Viacom (nyse: VIA.b - news - people ) have proved that.
Lisa DiCarlo, 03.04.05, 2:55 PM ET
Steven P. Jobs
NEW YORK - It's ironic that a company as innovative as Apple Computer could have such a regressive view of the changing world of American media.
The company, led by Chief Executive Steve Jobs, won a round in its quest to force three Apple (nasdaq: AAPL - news - people )-enthusiast Web sites to disclose their sources on articles they published regarding unannounced Apple products. In court filings the company argued that the Web sites were not protected by free speech because they are not legitimate members of the press.
The ruling, if it stands, will have a chilling and potentially devastating effect on not only blogs, which are growing in stature and prominence, but online media in general.
This potential threat to first amendment rights and Apple's crackdown on Web sites that, in general, love the company and its products, do nothing to bolster Apple's image. In fact, the company's success of late has yielded accusations of bullying and potentially unlawful business tactics, not to mention complaints that songs purchased from its iTunes music service, the dominant digital music store, don't work with music players other than its own. To some, that might sound like its neighbor to the north.
Apple argues that Web sites aren't protected by free speech provisions under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because they are not "legitimate members of the press." In most cases journalists, protected under the First Amendment guaranteeing free speech, do not have to reveal sources.
Problem is, the definition of journalism is rapidly changing. "Traditional" media like print newspapers, broadcast news and weekly magazines years ago began being augmented and in some cases supplanted by "new" media on the Web.
More recently blogs, or personal Web logs written by anybody with something to say, burst onto the scene and began changing the journalism landscape.
For the first time bloggers were awarded press credentials to the 2004 presidential conventions. Some of the more well-known bloggers have become fixtures on cable news channels. Bloggers have broken several major political stories, scooping the "legitimate" media. Today many portals and traditional news outlets are incorporating user-generated content and so-called citizen journalism into the mix.
The New York Times Co. (nyse: NYT - news - people ) for example, recently paid more than $400 million for uber-blog About.com.
If Apple prevails, does that mean that well-respected and award winning online-only publications like Salon and Slate, now owned by the Washington Post Company (nyse: WPO - news - people ) and CNet (nasdaq: CNET - news - people ) will not be protected under free speech? It's a slippery slope.
As we noted last month (see: "Stopping The Presses") the news landscape is increasingly dominated by nontraditional publishers like Google (nasdaq: GOOG - news - people ) Time Warner's (nyse: TWX - news - people ), Microsoft's (nyse: MSFT - news - people ) MSN and Yahoo! (nasdaq: YHOO - news - people ).
Today Susquehanna Financial Group issued an eight-page report on Yahoo's move into blogs and user-generated content, noting that blog readership grew 58% in 2004 and that blogs are "dramatically changing the availability of information on the Web."
Apple doesn't see this?
Dan Gillmor, the former San Jose Mercury News tech columnist, has started a project called Grassroots Media which, according to its Web site, is intended to encourage and enable more citizen-based media.
In a recent post he notes that, "If the party leaking information to Think Secret [one of the sites being sued] had sent it to, say, the San Jose Mercury News or The New York Times, and had those publications ran the news, Apple wouldn't be suing them."
And what is a legitimate member of the press anyway? Certainly being correct all the time does not qualify one to be "legitimized" by a media outlet. The scandals at The Times, USA Today and CBS News, a unit of Viacom (nyse: VIA.b - news - people ) have proved that.
.
Comment