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."
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?
Several analysts pointed out that John C Dvorak might not be fully qualified to analyze Apple either due to his prolific tendency to spew forth useless garbage completely devoid of any logic or insightful content.
I would like to use this opportunity to humbly request a new Article filter - a John Dvorak Filter. There's no reason to give this hack a moment of my time.
> 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?
Is this Bill's Birthday or something ?
5 MS Stories on Slashdot homepage, many looking like marketing speak
Slashdot hire a MS PR Guy as of late ?
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...
Dvorak's 1984 view of the Mac
"The Macintosh uses an experimental pointing device called a 'mouse'. There is no evidence that people want to use these things."
enough said
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.
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?
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.
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.
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.
"10 percent of computer users are Mac users, but remember, we are the top 10 percent."
- Douglas Adams
And yes, I selected that quote free from any bias whatsoever.
Why would that be weird? Is it weird if the entire newsroom were Microsoft Machines? Would it be weird if they were all Dells?
I often confront these guys with this assertion, and they, to a man (I've never confronted a female reporter about this),
Wait... I just need to stop here. Why do we care if he's ever asked a woman? Ok, forget it, let's go back...
I often confront these guys with this assertion, and they, to a man (I've never confronted a female reporter about this), all say that they use a Mac "because it is better." Right. And that attitude doesn't affect coverage now, does it?
Yeah, so when a tech columnist sits down to write an article about new/cool technology (sort of their job), they choose to write about the technology that they, as professionals, believe to be "better". Yeah, I'm still completely failing to see the problem here.
Microsoft should make some headway with this biased crowd once the fanciful Xbox 360 arrives. It's got a creative GUI, is easy to use and navigate, and kind of has a Mac look to it. It also interfaces perfectly with the iPod. "Oh golly gee whiz wow!" And that feature alone will be the clincher.
If he's so utterly unbiased, why does he care so much when Microsoft will 'get their due'. And, well, yes, it's been a while since a release of Windows or Office, so releasing their first major product in several years will probably get them into tech columns. Having a great GUI and the ability to interface with the most popular MP3 player around certainly won't hurt. So... what's all the whining about?
Go off-topic with John C. Dvorak
Oh, he's not just off-topic, he's irrelevant, and apparently a bit out of his mind as well.
I'm hoping you're aware of the circularity of that argument, given that the subject is media bias towards Apple?
Dvorak's comments make sense to me. Apple is the flashy, style, radical, celebrity, hype, media focus's tech company, and the meticulously cultivate that image. Microsoft is the grey cubicle, work 60 hours a week, flyover country tech company. I associate Apple with "looking cool", and the PC world with "work". Its probably because I have had PC's at almost every job I've hard. We've all had jobs with aging, nasty, dustbunny PCs performing some menial function. You rarely if ever see Mac's in that role unless you are in the publishing/marketing world.
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.
Considering the source, so what? Dvorak does nothing but trash Apple. Everyone of his articles is Microsoft slanted. He's basically a MS Fanboy who probably gets paid well on the side by MS to say nice things.
After years of Dvorak's predictions of doom and gloom about the demise of beleagured Apple, he's probably just pissed that his predictions weren't only wrong, but that Apple's enjoying some success. So he does what everyone else does--blame it on the media.
go Astros!
I might know what I'm talkin' about, but then again, this is Slashdot...
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
They already seem to be doing that. They are abusing their near-monopoly position in the online music market and the victims of that are the poor record company executives and share holders.
By refusing to increase the price of songs and albums on the iTunes Music Store, these people now have a hard time scraping a living and feeding their children.
I think it is time for the DoJ to step in and end this unfair business practice.
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.
...just makes me want to THROW A CHAIR!!!
"It's a wonderful idea. But it doesn't work." -- Tad Danielewski
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.
I can only think of you with pity for having encoded all 8000 songs in WMA, and then not being able to use them with a decent portable player.
You can use the iPod and never once have a DRM song touch your player. I have hundreds of CD's and they ripped just fine to DRM free MP3's.
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
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.