Mr. Jobs said: “I don’t want to see us descend into a nation of bloggers…I think we need editorial oversight now more than ever. Anything we can do to help newspapers find new ways of expression that will help them get paid, I am all for.”
via WSJ.com.
28 Comments
He appears to have been misquoted – the WSJ just ran a correction:
“Anything we can do to help newspapers find new ways of expression that will help them get paid through the Apple store, I am all for.”
@Cletus,
That sounds less like a correction and more like a purposeful omission of the first half of the quote in order to stem controversy.
Of course, we can trust these print establishments to be balanced because they have editors, right?
@Cletus,
I mean, you KNOW this is a video interview right?
@Cletus, oh my fricking god I need to sleep more often. I just got this joke.
two days programming instead of sleep is bad for your head
sorry sorry
@Cletus, pretty funny
What a pompous bag of wind.
I say AMEN to his point about descending into a nation of bloggers with no editorial oversight… That’s the real ‘meat’ of the quote for me.
@Cynthia Wood,
lol, what?
we already ARE a nation of bloggers.
And most bloggers have more editorial oversight than a print reporter ever did – the readers who can instantly point out any fallacy instead of waiting to send a letter or complaint for the next edition.
@Ian,
The sad irony is the WSJ article basically regurgitated a load of Jobs’ self-serving bullshit without offering any counterpoint. Is that the kind of editorial oversight we want more of? You can find a more balanced discussion on a lot of blogs.
Even the editorial oversight comment is self serving inasmuch as it portrays newspapers as somehow having more integrity than bloggers. Jobs’ comments were made at a WSJ-sponsored conference. The whole article seems a little too cozy to suit my taste. Jobs speaks at a WSJ conference, the WSJ gives Jobs a soapbox to make uncontested statements. Jobs praises newspapers for their editorial oversight. Sure, that’s journalistic integrity at work.
@Nojobs,
yeah, pretty much my feelings on it.
@Nojobs,
So, you do know that when Stevo says something, he means the complete contrary?
He’s like one big NOT Gate.
Examples:
“We will never build a phone.”
They build a phone.
“We will never do video on iPods.”
They do video on iPods.
“We will never build a tablet device.”
They build a tablet device.
etc..
WSJ will never give Stevo a hard time while Malt Wossberg is there. He does a better job at Apple & Jobs PR than Apple does.
His comment though, regarding not wanting the world (Apple is bigger than just the US) of bloggers, is right.
When I read news media, I want someone who is a trained communicator, who has investigated a story.
@bernard,
Here’s my issue with the blogger statement:
I think the established-publisher mantra as they try to forge a market in new media is going to be “big is better; only established organizations are credible”.
That simply is not true. There are a lot of very credible bloggers, with legitimate journalistic credentials, who are offering quality information unfiltered by advertisers and editorial boards with their heads up their asses.
The problem with journalism isn’t just that people don’t want to buy newspapers and magazines anymore. It’s many of the companies that produce newspapers and magazines have become profit-hungry big corporations who lost sight of journalistic integrity and responsibility. We need new blood, and the blogger community is one fertile source of new talent and independent thought.
If “new media” becomes the exclusive domain of the big publishers we’re just going to get the same old crap digitally.
And, once again, the WSJ article that formed the basis of this thread is nothing more than a Steve Jobs puff piece. He makes declarations, without substantiation, and the WSJ published it without any counterpoint or verification. That’s not journalism.
@bernard,
“His comment though, regarding not wanting the world (Apple is bigger than just the US) of bloggers, is right. When I read news media, I want someone who is a trained communicator, who has investigated a story.”
Thanks, Bernard. That was certainly one of the points I was trying to make…or at least allude to.
In addition to “training,” I think a code of professional ethics and standards is also important (although there will always be those who do not abide by those ethics/standards — as in ALL realms of society); as yet, I don’t think there is such a code in the blogosphere…
And yes, some bloggers truly are experienced, trained experts in their fields. And there is, no doubt, some self-regulation as well as some ‘regulation’ via readership in the blogosphere, but it’s not really the same… For one, who’s to say that the readers are trained/knowledgeable about the topic at hand? (Or ethical, for that matter…?)
I should note that I am using as a barometer the field of journalism when it’s at its ethical-professional best — like that portrayed in “All the President’s Men” (not the mega-corporation, sold-their-soul-to-the-highest-bidder brand of journalism we see so much of today).
Anyway, I am going deeper into the topic of journalistic integrity vs. blogger integrity than I ever intended with my original comment:
I really just wanted to express my exasperation over the lack of simple editorial oversight in the form of PROOFREADING and COPY EDITING. It seems like I can’t read a blog or a blog post without wincing over misspellings, typos and/or grammatical errors. (And I’m talking BASIC English — like misuse of the proper form of “than/then.”) To me it comes across as unprofessional…
But hey, we all have our own nemeses, causes, or things that ‘bug.’ Lack of good proofreading and copy editing on the interwebs happens to be one of mine.
Jobs should get the Nobel Peace Prize for his humanitarian efforts.
@m,
I think it’s called the iPeace Prize now.
Whatever people may think of Jobs, he is right on the money here.
@Donnar Party,
Right on the money, indeed.
Interesting quote, especially in how it relates to this recent article about Google’s effort to save the news featured in The Atlantic:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2010/06/how-to-save-the-news/8095/
I think that intended effort to preserve editorial outlets needs to be accomplished on several different levels and if the iPad assists in doing this in terms of delivery method – more power to them.
I’m wondering if the term “editorial oversight” may have been a generalization. The intent meaning that we need more than just lone bloggers regurgitating.
Good news organizations will have many people to help guide the voice and integrity of the news. Ideally it will have significantly more resources for the events on our plants:
– investigate
– access
– portray
– compare and contrast (historical context)
– disseminate
In the age of corporate wealth and influence, balance and diversity of information are vital.
@Bob,
The notion that you need a cast of thousands in order to be a credible news organization is flawed. There are a lot of individual reporters and editorial photographers who can do a top-notch job without any help.
It never hurts to have multiple people review editorial content for fairness, accuracy, style and grammatical correctness. But an individual, or small group, can be just as effective as a large organization. It’s more about commitment to excellence than organizational size.
I think this blog bashing mentality is going to be a common theme from large publishing organizations. The spin being only the established, large, publishing organizations are credible.
Certainly there are blogs that are nothing more than the rantings of an unstable zealot. But there are large publishers who give advertisers complete editorial control. Neither end of the spectrum is going to produce credible editorial content.
@nojobs,
There were always individual investigative reporters as well. Look at all the books out there written by them – sure they ended up with support staff and editors for distro, but the bulk of the work was often done by one person
@nojobs – you seem to be going off on rant or tangent and I don’t see it as all that relevant to the words I have written.
@Bob,
Opps. Typo: Plants = planets
interesting about editing being more important than ever!
I mean ipad will shock the newspaper’s expression, really.
iBook is a very good app. and we can edit photo on ipad.
I’m wondering if the term “editorial oversight” may have been a generalization. The intent meaning that we need more than just lone bloggers regurgitating.
Good news organizations will have many people to help guide the voice and integrity of the news. Ideally it will have significantly more resources for the events on our plants:
iPhone, iPad, ipod and some of other digital products of Apple company are walking into people’s life gradually and plays a significant roles in our daily life. Even though there some unavoidable limitation, but we should believe iPad is striving to change everything, we are looking forward the apple’s addition digital products: mac dvd to ipad converter
Comments are closed for this article!