Dear Technology Section Editor ,
Mainstream Media Publication,
After many years of observing your publication in operation and as it attempts to make the transition to a digital news flow, may I offer the following reasons why some of your syndicated, featured, or freelance writers, be they journalists or bloggers or members of the kommentariat at large, may cause you to shift their fields of interest. Or:
Ten ways you know your tech journalists should be switched from covering Apple Inc. to say, Microsoft or RIM:
1. They refer to any success Apple enjoys as being due to its legions of “iSheep”, “fanbois” or cult believers who will indiscriminantly buy anything Apple due to Apple’s vast marketing budget and prowess. They will perhaps give a very brief mention to design and production qualities, but keep the focus on slavish followers.
2. They damn Apple for not having the courage to enter the enterprise market and compete head to head with Microsoft, thus revealing they haven’t seen or heard Steve Jobs’ metaphors of trucks and cars, and a post-PC world, nor do they understand the term “flight to the bottom”.
3. They rabbit on about “market share” and how low is Apple’s with respect to the desktop OS, while conveniently ignoring Apple’s quarterly profits, growth and customer satisfaction surveys. Oh, and its market share with respect to the iOS-powered devices.
4. They hold up examples of failed Apple products as to why Apple might fail with its next rumoured product… “remember the Pippin, the Newton, The Cube? See, Apple doesn’t get it right always….”
5. They admonish Apple for releasing or spreading rumours there will be a product “soon” but one which Steve Jobs said Apple would never do. This is used as an example of Apple’s lack of trustworthiness, but bald-faced lying. iPod Video 5th gen., anyone?
6. They report on how worried Apple should be because they really believe RIM is about to turn the corner and blow the tech world out of the water with the next Blackberry with its new OS. Or Microsoft will do it with Windows 8, or Nokia will… you get the picture.
7. They do “exclusive” product review “showdowns” between vapourware products no one has been able to put side by side e.g. “Who will win? We compare Microsoft’s Surface RT versus Apple’s iPad 7 inch.”
8. In predicting Apple’s future, they can’t help themselves from referring to Microsoft “saving” Apple from oblivion at the time of Steve Jobs’ return in 1997, with an investment of $150 million in non-voting stock, thus perpetuating demonstrably untrue folklore.
9. They include current quotes from Steve Wozniak about contemporary Apple issues like design, functionality or competitiveness, things he would be best to leave alone for oh… the past 20 years, and the next 20 to come.
10. They continually present you with articles about Apple which are lists of ten things Apple could do differently, should be doing, are not doing, are doing worse than anyone else, etc., etc. And they spread all ten over 5 pages to demonstrate how they are truly clickwhores, which badly reflects on your publication.
These are my ten. Dear Reader, I’m sure I’ve missed a few… can you assist with your own, and assist Dear Editor out of this dilemma?