Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

cultofmac.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 52 posts

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#31

Post by Semaphor »

mstolpm wrote: post #22

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…

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?

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#32

Post by 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.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#33

Post by deathcakes »

nknighthb wrote: post #30
mansr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 care…

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

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

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#34

Post by alan_cx »

dxm wrote: post #4

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 arti…

"Does the author really think that Apple put this much thought into not letting certain journalists into new coverage. "

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.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#35

Post by Iftheshoefits »

mansr wrote: post #10
stevebennso wrote: post #7

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 any…

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 care…

Apple's target market doesn't give a shit about anybody's reviews of their new products. Their target market will buy whatever new products they produce simply because of the Apple logo on it.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#36

Post by Iftheshoefits »

epo wrote: post #6
[deleted] wrote: post #3

[deleted]

Tries to compare Apple's behaviour to McCarthyism. Hilarious really, the kind of paranoid, whining nonsense that is only taken seriously by witless Apple haters, the sort that downvoted you without comment, presumably.

Of course the author himself notes that a direct comparison is absurd, and that the examples from the Red Scare are illustrative of the purpose and historical context for blacklist.

Perhaps you were a bit hasty in calling others witless.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#37

Post by enraged_camel »

Iftheshoefits wrote: post #35
mansr wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 care…

Apple's target market doesn't give a shit about anybody's reviews of their new products. Their target market will buy whatever new products they produce simply because of the Apple logo on it.

This effect is grossly exaggerated. I'm a self-described Apple "fanboi" but I make sure to read every product review and make an intelligent decision. I'm still on iPad 3 ("the new iPad") and iPhone 4S for this reason.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#38

Post by jmspring »

chadwickthebold wrote: post #29
ryguytilidie wrote: post #26

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.

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."

"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.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#39

Post by jrochkind1 »

dxm wrote: post #4

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 arti…

I absolutely assume any company even close to as big as Apple spends 'that much thought' on managing their PR, absolutely. I'd be shocked if they did not.

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.

Re: How Apple’s ‘Blacklist’ Manipulates the Press

#40

Post by 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.'

Post reply on HN