Slashdot Mirror
Are Media Writers Biased Towards Apple?
Art Vanderlay writes "Readers should not be surprised by overcoverage of Apple Computers since the tech writers and columnists for the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, and Fortune are all Mac users. According to John Dvorak of PC Mag, no one seems to point out the connection between the skewed coverage and the existence of this peculiar conflict of interest based on the national writers' use of Macs. He feels the newsroom editors are generally so out of touch that they can't see this bias and are also Mac users." From the article: "This reality is not going to change. In fact it will only get worse as technology coverage is handed to newer, less-qualified observers who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer. With no Microsoft-centric frame of reference, Microsoft cannot look good. The company essentially brought this on itself with various PR and marketing policies that discouraged knowledgeable coverage. I'll save those complaints for a future gripe session."
I think some of the same could be said for Slashdot too.
Don't worry, I will post this anon.
Umm... Isn't it human nature to root for the underdog? Good vs. Evil? Et cetera?
More
And HA!
I am astounded that such an astute observer as Dvorak didn't seem to pick up on the fact that the virulent "Apple is Dying" meme in the 90s was perpetuated primarily by PC-using columnists...
Decides that writers are all using Macs, are biased and of course must be wrong.... because they have no frame of reference unlike himself who works for a magazine that talks of Windows Vista as being the second coming.
Hello Pot... have you met kettle?
An Eye for an Eye will make the whole world blind - Gandhi
This reality is not going to change. In fact it will only get worse as technology coverage is handed to newer, less-qualified observers who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer.
Perhaps these happy Mac users are former Windows users? Dvorak is going on a limb by assuming they're techo-illiterates who haven't used Windows.
Trolling is a art,
Not meant to be a troll, but what splashy and cool stuff that's appealing to the public has Microsoft done lately outside of the XBOX 360 that might merit some coverage?
Ugh. Of course MS won't get coverage if it doesn't do anything actually newsworthy -- but if it does, it will. Note how long it's been since XP came out (the service packs in fact get -much- more coverage than the free updates to OS X) and how much buzz there's been recently over Vista.
Also behold E3, one of MS' few opportunities to introduce cool new hardware like Apple does every five minutes.
> connection between the skewed coverage and the existence of this peculiar
>conflict of interest based on the national writers' use of Macs.
So Mac users are biased and have a conflict of interest, while Microsoft users don't? That's ridiculous to suggest that someone can't be objective if they use a particular platform.
I knew that person who used to accuse me of being platform-biased since I use a Mac. I ignored it until once I responded to him, "Look, I purchased Microsoft Office, I purchased Microsoft Windows to work with Virtual PC. I have no problems using Windows, Linux, or whatever. I even own Microsoft stock. How much Microsoft stuff do I have to own for you to considered me unbiased?"
> From the article: "This reality is not going to change. In fact it will only get
> worse as technology coverage is handed to newer, less-qualified observers
> who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer.
Dvorak's just trying to troll. Dvorak admitted years ago that he trolled for responses: calling the iBook a makeup case (1999), writing articles about fake dreams ("In my dream, Jobs was in line at a movie theater with Bill Gates..." from 1998), and my favorite,
He's just doing it again. Moreover, he's claiming "bias" without suitable proof -- and the burden of proof on Dvorak is a lot greater than "I could list 50". Hey, John, if you really think your fellow columns and analysts are biased, then name names. But waving around your secret list in order to troll is silly.
Crying bias! is just Dvorak's way of crying for help.
Insert simplistic political, ideological, or personal proselytization here.
The article does go on to say that many editors use macs, which would be one good reason why coverage would be a little more pronounced. But the fact that Apple makes a few products (their own) for a few systems (their own, for the most part) helps some too, I think. People are used to seeing innovation from Apple - products that at the very least look sleek and stylish, and in the best cases do amazing things as well.
The "press" is human as well, and I would find it hard to fault them for acting that way. To sum it up - a company that generally has interesting media events has another coming up. Wouldn't you be inclined to pay attention?
This says a lot.
People who write about technology are going to know a lot about it, and so they are going to be in a better informed position to choose what is best because they have both seen a lot of technology and thought about it a lot. They choose Macs.
Dvorak writes for a Windows magazine...
Well, you said it first buddy.
That said, I don't see a bias, its simply the fact that Apple are releasing a lot of new, interesting and highly popular products lately, while Microsoft simply aren't. Just wait until Longhorn or the XBox 360 are released, and you'll see that the big media will cover Microsoft's products just as eagerly.
The bias for Apple is clearly obvious (full disclosure: I'm a Machead). However, look back at the early 90s when Apple was clearly not doing as well. It's not like media coverage was overwhelmingly in favor of Apple then. Was it that Apple made interesting products that caused media coverage or media coverage that caused Apple to make interesting products? I think it's the former. I remember reading/seeing good coverage in favor of Microsoft when it came out with Windows 95, Internet Explorer, and the XBox. What have they done since then that's all that interesting or even good? Until they come out with products that are as interesting as their milestones in the past, they're not going to get good media coverage. My point is that you're essentially missing what the cause is and what the effect is. No matter what, there will be bias, but look beyond that, and you'll see that the coverage itself has merit.
Hmmm.... so people who like Macintoshes enough to use them should be disqualified from voicing their opinions because they've demonstrated a preference for Macs? Any possibility that, you know, they use Macs for good reason?
This reality is not going to change. In fact it will only get worse as technology coverage is handed to newer, less-qualified observers who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer. With no Microsoft-centric frame of reference, Microsoft cannot look good.
Ok, so, I think I'm beginning to understand. You need some genius-level technical prowess to get a Windows computer to work, so as coverage is turned over to normal people, they're bound to prefer Macintoshes. Without being Microsoft-biased, Microsoft cannot look good.
The company essentially brought this on itself with various PR and marketing policies that discouraged knowledgeable coverage.
Huh? Which company? Apple? So Apple "brought this on themselves", the 'this' being good press, by various marketing/PR policies? In other words, their marketing/PR is effective? Is that a criticism?
Or does he mean Microsoft brought it on themselves by marketing with FUD? And finally...
He feels the newsroom editors are generally so out of touch that they can't see this bias and are also Mac users.
From the news I see, I'd say editors are generally so out of touch that they can't see any of their biases. Or else they're paid off by their advertisers, as PC Magazine seems to be.
Whenever Steve Jobs shows all those media quotes at his keynotes praising apple products, there is always one from the new york times, and the writer is always David Pouge. He is highly qualified to write articles on the Mac beat, he used to edit macworld (I think, or was it macuser) and he wrote Macs for Dummies and many other books. He is probably the most extreme example of what DVORAK is talking about. But, his articles are generally good, they aren't fan-boy by any strech, he explains why the apple experience is better for the end user, but he does often have a lot of complaints about apple products. Now, I work in a newsroom myself, for a very small newspaper, we are mac based. Every time somebody new comes on they are like "Oh, I don't get macs" and spend the first couple weeks complaining about them, but within a year, 90% of them have bought Macs for themselves, after experiencing OS X, they want it for themselves. It makes sense to me that editors would have no problem with pro-apple articles, nor should they. Yes, they use macs, but they use them for a reason: they are better.
But I thought Windows was supposed to be easy to use... Perhaps Dvorak is right, and everyone who isn't a CS major should give up Windows and switch to Macs.
Good idea, John!
Dvorak didn't just jump the shark with this one, he did a backflip, danced on its snout, and drank a tall glass of Microsoft Kool-Aid while doing it...
First of all, "it will only get worse as technology coverage is handed to newer, less-qualified observers who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer"? Is Dvorak really insinuating that only the elite use Windows these days? I mean, c'mon, by virtual of nothing less than market share Windows is used by the vast majority of people who still wonder what that cup holder thingy is supposed to do. Mac users by and large tend to be infinitely more technically astute than Windows users. His argument as as asinine as it comes here.
The fact is that Macintosh has undoubtedly attracted a large following with members of the media. Dvorak's essential thesis is right on the money. Time might as well be a division of Apple's PR department. Walter Mossberg gives glowing reviews to anything Apple. David Pogue at The New York Times tends to be a big Apple booster as well. Apple users are known for their fanatical devotion to the brand, and Apple has a lot more mindshare in the media industry than Microsoft.
The problem with Dvorak's article is that it takes a good argument and turns it into a piece with all the coherency and logic of a USENET troll. Let's face it, at least Apple boosters are part of the in crowd. People who continually make such ad hominem excuses for the fact that Microsoft is losing mindshare at a massive rate end up looking like a bunch of crochety Kool-Aid guzzlers. Yes, Apple has a disproportionate influence in the media, but its hard to argue with the fact that much of it is due to the fact that they make a better set of products and they work harder to ensure customer loyalty than Microsoft.
"This reality is not going to change. In fact it will only get worse as technology coverage is handed to newer, less-qualified observers who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer."
doesn't that, sort of, imply that windows is too difficult to, you know, use?
when the "underdog" sleeps with the enemy.
I think it was Wilt Chamberlain who said, "Nobody roots for Goliath".
Someone (here?) recently made a very convincing argument that journalists consistently give light-and-thin laptops much better ratings (on average) than heavier notebooks, even though the two are really for two different things. Why? Because all journalists seem to have roughly the same usage pattern - cart laptop around on plane, use it to take notes at the conference, post stories from hotel room using WiFi, and so forth. Thus, journalists need a smaller laptop, and thus give them better reviews, but unfairly bash larger ones as being inadequate. They are - but only if you're a journalist who's running around all the time. A college student who just wants something he can leave on his dorm room desk, but easily take home on break, is probably going to prefer a larger, more powerful notebook or DTR.
I'm not sure if this is as true for Macs, but it probably enters the equation somehow. If the writer says "I would never give up my Mac for anything, and I hate Microsoft and Linux even if they were better, yada yada", there's certainly some emotional bias involved, and they should probably think twice about their journalistic integrity before submitting the review for publication. Certainly the _editors_ should be concerned about the reputation of their publication.
Ideally, a computer review shouldn't be just one person's thoughts on it - they would have a team of three or four people (the gamer, the journalist, the businessman, the IT guy) that each post their own thoughts on how the computer performs for them, and how well it meets their expectations given cost. They should be reasonably open-minded about different operating systems, and also be skilled with all of them (not as hard as it sounds, really).
-Erwos
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
No, Apple takes a close second to Google on slashdot. I swear not a day goes by without some story about one of these 2 companies. Even this one is a sort of meta-story about apple stories. Really quite useless, but here it is just because it has "Apple" in the title.
I guess Zonk thinks the media should be reporting on all of Microsoft's great product releases over the last couple of weeks. Like ... umm ... err ...
I'm sure it'll be different when Longhorn or XBox 360 are released, and we'll see that these "horribly biased" media companies report on Microsoft. And when the Playstation 3 comes out, the media will report on Sony. It's only to be expected. Reporting on new products that are likely to make a HUGE market impact is a sensible thing for a tech writer to do, and right now Apple's innovation machine is in overdrive.
Good one. I'm still ROTFL. Made my day. Hey, that's a good one. Gotta love it. Good going. A winner.
Umm, all the PC Magazines are published and printed with Macs, and always have been. Doesn't stop them from writing about Microsoft, the x86PC, or any of that stuff. A lot of ads for PCs, PC gear, PC software, etc are laid up on Macs. Doesn't stop them from selling PC gear.
What's changed is the company and it's products (Apple); in particular the iPod. In fact, the player is really the one responsible; everyone, including PC users, seems to have bought one and that's what's creating the buzz. Before the iPod, people kind-of-sort-of knew there was probably a difference but didn't really pay attention. Now, they are curious and the media simply reflects that by talking about it more (a lot more).
Is it only me who noticed that Dvorak is writing about Macs in an article about too much Mac coverage?
Microsoft's got a horizontal monopoly, but it looks like Apple's going for the vertical monopoly.
There's nothing wrong with operating a monopoly per se - and in the Microsoft case the problem was never with Microsoft being a monopoly - the DoJ case was brought because it was alleged that Microsoft had abused its monolpoly position.
In other words, wake me up not when Apple have a monolpoly, but when they start abusing their monolpoly position.
This is where the serious fun begins.
And honestly, how many "enthusiastic" windows users do you know?
I think I know the answer as to why there are not more "enthusiastic" windows users. It's not strictly because of a lack of material to be excited about. The prevailing geek culture absolutely prevents it. The prevailing culture is so biased, yes biased, against Microsoft that anybody claiming to be a MS enthusiast in not-so-proverbially booed off the proverbial stage. I am not being a troll, and I am not claiming at all that at least part of that bias is justified, I am just saying that's the way the wind blows. And most geeks are no less susceptible to cultural pressure than anybody else... maybe even more susceptible.
Trolls: The high-tech version of those morons that scrawl obscenities in public bathrooms.
It has been patently obvious for years now that Dvorak is intentionally caustic to generate banner ad impressions on his web column. DON'T FEED THE TROLLS.
When the Dvorak Reality Distortion Field is fully engaged, it's possible to rail on other members of the press for bias while ignoring your own.
Stating on Slashdot that I like cheese since 1997.
Hand it to Dvorak to take a thoughtful argument and throw in some utter bullshit (the ipod video comments) to make him sound like the hack he is. He's wrong about the video ipod in so many ways. TV episodes are NOT free, as you have to watch commercials (and pay with your time), or pay money for a TiVo-like service to remove them. You most certaily can not watch older episodes unless it's in syndication and you need the previously mentioned Tivo-like service to record them. Also, you don't need the iPod video to watch the TV shows. You are free to download and watch them right in iTunes. Fuck you Dvorak. You are as biased as those you are bitching about. Instead of discounting out of hand, any product that Apple creates, why don't you give it some intelligent consideration first? The little iPod you hate sells the fuck out of any other mp3 player on the market.
It's a natural bias. Media Writers use apple. And Media Writers are biased towards Media Writers. Just as there are so many movies about movies, how the content of the Internet is biased towards computers, how so much Hip-Hop is about making Hip-Hop, how journalists make a sensational news from a journalist being assaulted. Just see such rage from journalists if, say, laws of a farmer get broken that way!
It's a natural bias, that authors of given media are creating works about their media. And since media writers use macs, they write about macs. Nothing strange here.
Anagram("United States of America") == "Dine out, taste a Mac, fries"
but here it is just because it has "Apple" in the title
Unlike every Linux story.
EricAre clicks from China and India automatically invalid?
Maybe tech writers use Macs because they are attuned to the details of technology, and they have a budget to buy them.
Apple gets a lot of coverage right now because a) they have new products to cover right now, b) they have a history of important innovation, c) they are one of the largest computer makers in the world, and d) they are succeeding at a strategy that all computer makers are trying--transitioning to a large consumer electronics company.
Build a man a fire, he's warm for one night. Set him on fire, and he's warm for the rest of his life.
So, if you're a big-name tech reviewer - i.e., you pay for none of your own gear - you have a preference for stylishly designed, high-end equipment? Who woulda thunk it?
He is, you know. Apple keynotes given by Jobs actually get reported on the mainstream news in the UK. Frankly, Apple's still newsworthy because they're still one of the biggest computer manufacturers around, despite the market share of their system vs Windows. And, of course, iPod is the biggest product BY FAR in the neo-Walkman market.
Am I the only guy who remembers the time period when you were hard pressed to find an Apple-related article that didn't include the word "beleaguered" to describe the company? The same time period when (IIRC) a MacWorld columnist named John Dvorak pronounced the platform dead and went over to the other side?
Journalists prefer Macs now because Apple has gotten their shit together since the advent of OS X and the iPod, and has been putting out good stuff. The journalists have found modern Macs usable enough to try them out for longer periods of time, and have found that they like what they're seeing. Historically, people who have a decent amount of experience* with both platforms overwhelmingly prefer Macs.
~Philly
* "Decent amount of experience" = Having done actual work on a Mac, not spent 5 minutes playing around with a one in an Apple Store before prnouncing it 'lame' or 'stupid' and going home to their 'leet gaming rig.
I'm hoping you're aware of the circularity of that argument, given that the subject is media bias towards Apple?
Am i the only one who thought this was totally backwards? I no longer pay much attention to mainstream news, but i've seen countless stories about viruses, trojans, system failures stranding US Navy ships, and so on, never with any mention of the fact that these problems are specific to Microsoft platforms. I can see some argument that in the case of things like ship navigation computers failing, the general public doesn't really care what OS the thing was running (i don't really believe that argument, but i think it could be made with a straight face). But the fact that end users could protect their home computer from the very threat that stories about viruses and the like are reporting on is directly relevant to the story at hand for the general public. The fact that i've never heard this mentioned at least suggests the existence of a pro-Microsoft bias in the stories.
i speak for myself and those who like what i say.
If one's choice of hardware and operating system play such a key role in determining their journalistic bias, then it might usefully be argued that journalists and newsrooms that use Microsoft software running on Intel hardware would find it impossible to view Apple software & hardware in a positive light.
If this is so, then it might also explain the second-banannadom that Apple has suffered over the years. Mod me down if you like, O Macolytes, but part of the fervency of your devotion is that, for many years, you have gotten short shrift in the press, in the form of constant ruminations of Apple's imminent collapse. At best, Apple was damned with faint praise.
Personally, I think the present fuss has more to do with Apple's absolutely killer marketing and branding, which far surpass anything that the competition has yet been able to muster up. Their Stalinist level of control over everything--software, hardware, accessories, look, feel, heft, etc--has given their products a very consistent look across all lines. Even the name "Apple," is technical, nonthreatening, and cuddly.
personally i find them more appealing if they were more neutral, and actually be news for nerds, instead of, just a biased view of tech news. Dont get me wrong, what goes in the comments area i do not care, people have their own view and opinions about MS, apple, goolge, ibm, sun, sco etc. BUT the news article submissions must be neutral, and it is the editors jobs to get that right
Ok, I'm a PC user, always have been. I like the idea of Macs, but I'm a gamer, so I have PCs. With that in mind...
So what he's saying is that mac writers are biased towards the benefit of Apple... They have Apple computers, they use Apple computers, they like Apple computers, and so they write about Apple in a positive way.
Now, think about the bias of windows users. They have Windows, they use Windows, they hate Windows, they write about Microsoft in a negative way (or not at all).
This is not just about bias because Apple computers are what people happen to use at the time. This is bias because Apple has created a product that its users appreciate. This is why Apple is in a position right now where its products are almost universally lauded, while Microsoft's are often reviled. The media reflects this.
It's Microsoft not living up to peoples' expectations, while Apple gives them a superior experience (and the people are glad for it). So yes, I guess you could say that people are biased towards getting what they want.
As far as I'm concerned it's not bias, it's karma.
~D
This sig has been enciphered with a one-time pad. It could say almost anything.
A well-known, convicted monopolist releases buggy, unreliable software.
A well-known, convicted monopolist then seeks to sell a 'protection' service to keep said buggy, unreliable software working, and much of the media sees this as a boon.
A well-known, convicted monopolist releases 'leaks' of a 'Next-Generation' operating system, whose primary features are a new GUI, whose primary characteristics change substantially between each set of 'leaks'. Yet every tech journalist and their mother OOHs and AAHs these 'leaks'.
A well-known, convicted monopolist releases 'interviews' with the characteristics of a press release, discussing how growing markets represent a grand opportunity for the company. This same company, whose 'Next-Generation' operating system is extremely late and feature triaged to the point of unrecognition, is portrayed as setting itself up for a 'win' in that it will 'beat' current market leaders by providing features they've provided for years.
Yep; tech journalists are biased. Mr. Dvorak, please keep telling me about how Apple is doomed; it gives me a great way to discredit you with any PHBs who might actually be _reading_ your tripe.
WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
It's good to see that he's keeping with the times. This is the same argument that the neocons use to galvinize their base.
Just like the oh-so-threatened christians out there, the PC users are being oppressed by the nasty minority! Woe is them! Oh, the humanity! The unjustness of it all!
How dare this minority continue to exist and, worse, be noticed!
"It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
Apple, back in the day, gave tremendous discounts to schools and learning institutions, in order
to get the personal computer into people's lives. What better way to INDOCTRINATE people, than
getting them to be exposed to the Apple product first? A ONE button mouse, for the easily confused,
nice easy GUI. Good graphics and sound capabilities.
The PC indusrty simple dropped the ball on this one. It is not magic. Most of those writers grew
up with Apple machines. Therefore the 'bias". QED.
I'd like to see some hard evidence that supports his claims. He says: "...today's newspaper and magazine tech writers know little about computers and are all Mac users. It's a fact."
But in typical Dvorak fashion, provides no evidence to support his positions. Where are the hard numbers that he based his conclusions on? There aren't any, because he pulls his supposed "facts" out his ass and presents them to the world. Typical Dvorak BS.
"...90 percent of the mainstream writers being Mac users..." --- Support your facts John. Where'd you get your numbers?
"I could list 50." -- So, then there's only 55 newspaper and magazine tech writers in the media? What a load of crap.
I have used both platforms and have thrown my mouse against the wall with a "Fuck You Bill Gates" more than once and have never been so provoked by frustration with Mac. Is this due to media spin or my user experience?...I think the later.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
This article by Dvorak represents something of a huge milestone for Apple. It was just a few years ago that the media was all over Apple - in a bad way! Everything that you read about Apple indicated that it was a sinking ship (or already sunk). I was at Apple's World Wide Developer's Conf. just after Jobs came back to Apple, and he said that step #1 for Apple was to stop the bad press (which he admitted was well deserved). Step #2 to empower developers (gotta say that at a WWDC), and step #3 was to produce great products. He's been sticking to the plan. The bad press slowed down, then for a couple of years you didn't hear anything about Apple in the press (most thought they had gone away). Now Dvorak has confirmed that they're back - in a big way. It's been an amazing turnaround!! If I recall, Dvorak was one of the ones in the media leading the charge in smearing the Apple - only difference between now and then is that back then he had lots of company and he was lov'n it. Now he's pretty much alone, so all he can do is whine.
"...observers who simply cannot use a Microsoft Windows computer."
They report about Macs, because Macs are computers that people can use.
Writers overwhelmingly use Macs because they can't afford the effort required to keep them running, or the downtime when they are stopped cold by viruses. They are certainly being "objective" in the choice of machine that they demand for their work. They can't afford to be "impartial" about their bread-and-butter. That should say something.
I have two author friends. Both run Macs. The first one used a pc until he lost weeks trying to keep the damn thing running. No he doesn't have an"IT" guy to maintain a firewall, virus software, malware software, and daily windows fixes. He took my advice and bought a iBook. He never regrets it.
Be heard || Be herd
Its hard for me to believe that these writers are so incompetent
that they can't manage to use Windows.
On the contrary its more likely that these professionals, who use
computers to get their job done every day, are exceptionally
discriminating in the selection of the tools that they use.
Their careers depend on it. They can't afford to
constantly stub their professional toe and skin their knuckels using
cheap hobbyists tools that they picked up on special in the bin under the
big red cardboard sign near the exit of a discount store.
Computer software that is a constant security risk and whose security can
only be improved according to its manufacturer by installing
a dysfunctional service pack needs no one to give it a bad name.
Software that refuses to save a file for no apparent reason doesn't need
a bad rap it creates its own truthfully bad rap.
Pushing stupid spin statistics about how everything else out there
is just as defective and insecure will fool some people but not people
who truly value their time and just want to get their job done. For these
people the boolshite detector has a hair trigger. They don't worry about a few
hundred dollars price difference when a cheap piece of trash sucks down a half
a day of their professional time because they didn't happen to know something that
means nothing and relates to nothing but the fact that the people who manufactured
the software fracked up. For the rest of the population it seems
that a good cleverly spun explanation/argument using statistics about
why a PC is dysfunctional (but lets not forget inexpensive and fast)
is a 100% substitute for a computer that actually is functional.
Its quite and interesting social phenomenon.
Maybe the problem is that Dvorak doesn't distinguish between trash knowledge
and real knowledge. Trash knowledge is all the things that you have to know
to use a PC without stubbing your toe and skinning your knuckles while trying to get
your work done without the help of a professional IT staff whose main job
is to limit the use of the machines to the narrow range of things
that they can do well without trashing files and fracking up in general.
Its a sad fact that many noncomputer professionals are strutting proud of the
fact that they can master a PC. They act as though there should be something to
master in the first place. How did we get to a situation where its the user
who feels inept when its the software manufacturer who should be
subjected to class action law suits and prosecution for fraud.