News Corp. and Apple Unveil The Daily

RedEaredSlider writes "The Daily, the digital publication designed specifically for Apple's iPad, is now available on the App Store. The publication's launch came during a press event at New York's Guggenheim Museum. News Corp. CEO Rupert Murdoch and Apple Vice President of Internet Services Eddy Cue were joined by The Daily's Editor-in-Chief Jesse Angelo. The Daily, which copies the look and feel of a newspaper or magazine, is aimed at embracing the multimedia capabilities of Apple's iPad. Rupert Murdoch said that The Daily offers 'unthinkable innovations' to the world of publishing."

Comments

Evil reaches the iPad

[N3tRunner]

I'm not sure why Apple would want to get involved in this manner with the greatest evil in our world today, News Corp. If they want to make an app for the iPad, that's fine, but I don't see why Apple would want to publicize this new app as forging some kind of relationship between the two companies.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[frizop]

This is exactly how I feel. What in the world would make you want to be a purveyor of obviously one sided misinformation?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

The combination of Apple's reality distortion field and News Corps own variety of reality distortion field will meld into a new self supporting super reality that they believe will finally envelope all civilizations and extinguish all scepticism and contradictory facts.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[dkleinsc]

the greatest evil in our world today

I agree that News Corp is evil, but it's hard to call them the "greatest evil in our world today".

Yes, when governments imprison people without trial, torture people, shoot unarmed citizens, encourage companies to fire people for their political views, build a massive surveillance state, etc etc, News Corp is there to cheer them on, hire on their political leaders, and propagandize the population into going along with these measures. But they aren't the ones actually doing it. They are part of the machine, but they aren't the machine, and they definitely aren't the ones controlling the machine.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

Yeah, they should have teemed up with MSNBC.

Haha.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[poetmatt]

rupert murdoch is basically the heart and soul of everything that's wrong with things online for the past 10 years, so I don't find i wrong to put a focus on things he owns as being the problem.

go google rupert murdoch failures and the list is amazing. a rich man who does nothing right, is too old for his times, and thinks making artificial scarcity is the way to run a business.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

False equivalency. Fox News has been proven, again and again, to lie on air nearly continuously. Heck, they fought and won a lawsuit defending their right to lie on air.

Please, when you make an outrageous claim such as implying that MSNBC lies as much as Fox, try to back it up with some data. I realize you can't, as there is no data showing that, so perhaps you should just refrain from spreading lies. Fox has that covered.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd also like to point out that Murdoch has a point with his criticism of the BBC providing the entire country with a homogenous government-funded viewpoint to the detriment of its alternative. It's a pity his reasons are so ridiculously transparently self-serving.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Samalie]

They should have teamed up with FoxNews

There...fixed that for you

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[alvinrod]

They get a cut of the sales most likely and with traditional newspapers having a lot of financial problems, people are looking for new ways to repackage news and information and make money off of it. If this venture is successful it's likely that others will offer various organs through the App Store, making even more money for Apple.

Also, News Corp has been one of the few companies to actually try different revenue streams. They'll eventually get one right and then the rest of the papers, magazines, etc. that have been sitting around waiting to die might be able to copy whatever model that is to stay afloat. Say what you want about their content, but they've been one of the few companies to actually try and adapt with the times.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not sure why Apple would want to get involved in this manner with the greatest evil in our world today, News Corp. If they want to make an app for the iPad, that's fine, but I don't see why Apple would want to publicize this new app as forging some kind of relationship between the two companies.

When two reality distortion fields collide. This should be interesting.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[fuzzyfuzzyfungus]

They didn't actually want to; but what they needed from News Corp cannot be bought with mere money...

Here is what is really going on: News Corp has a problem: its congenital inability to appeal to anybody under 45 who isn't to the right of Rush Limbaugh. Apple also has a problem: its charismatic overlord is dying.

Now here is where they synergy comes in: Given the fact that Rupert Murdoch has managed to maintain an unnatural state of demi-life since approximately 1347(incidentally, the year the Black Death reached Europe. Coincidence? We report, you decide.), New Corp obviously possesses the knowledge of dark Necromacy that Apple's board needs in order to preserve their most valued corporate asset in near-perpetuity. Apple, for their part, possesses a nigh-hypnotic power over the consumer segments that News Corp cannot reach.

Now you see the real bargain being made here...

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[BJ_Covert_Action]

I'm not sure why Apple would want to get involved in this manner with the greatest evil in our world today.

Answer: Money.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Amorymeltzer]

News Corp is one of the largest media companies around and, love it or hate it, the Fox News Channel has been wildly successful. It has more viewers than MSNBC and CNN combined. Slashdot is but a small microcosm of the world and when it comes to American media, Fox and News Corp are the most desired by consumers. You and I don't have to agree ideologically with News Corp, but this is a numbers game making this a huge win for Apple.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[just_another_sean]

Fixed what? FoxNews is News Corp. so I fail to see how this changes his opinion that MSNBC is as biased as FoxNews,

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Frangible]

Yes, because Apple is deeply ashamed of already having the WSJ on it. Oh, wait... (for those of you not getting the sarcasm, the WSJ is a highly-regarded publication by News Corp that also has an iPad app)

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[just_another_sean]

I tend to agree but I think the parent was making a statement about bias, not how trustworthy one is over the other. MSNBC does have a pretty obvious bias to the left. I don't think they're outright as disingenuous as FoxNews so I think you're right, it's not a fair comparison. But if you look at strictly from a NPOV perspective neither of them are shining pillars of neutral and fair journalism. That said, not many news organizations are anymore because, being owned by big media companies, ratings and revenue trump the truth every time.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Evil reaches the iPad? Apple gets involved with evil?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

Nah, I find idiots and their "news" hilarious. It's like watching monkeys watching monkey news, with the monkey anchors flinging poop at the monkey audience, and vice versa.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

No, MSNBC has a centrist pro-corporate bias. You might be surprised to find out that MSNBC is not some grass roots hippie mom and pop operation, but is owned by a rather large and conservative corporation. Morning Joe, anyone? Okay, I guess they did have this Olbermann guy on there for a while, to throw a sop to the liberals, but the owners couldn't stand him, so they got rid of him.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[dkleinsc]

Given the fact that Rupert Murdoch has managed to maintain an unnatural state of demi-life since approximately 1347

Is Rupert Murdoch some sort of Australian vampire? It's just a question, it's not like I'm insinuating anything.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[zach_the_lizard]

IE has been the heart and soul of all that was wrong, and unless he had any part in that, Murdoch is not the most evil thing to the web. He's still at least 1 or 2 steps behind the RIAA and MPAA.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[osgeek]

I'm a junkie for all the news channels. I just flip through them whenever they show commercials and stop when there's an actual program on. They all have noticeable biases and lie implicitly and explicitly. There was a study over the 2008 elections that showed Fox was the most balanced when talking about the candidates of all the networks during the news coverage (study wasn't over the opinion shows). Go figure.

It seems somewhat likely that there is more data on Fox's fabrications because it's a target. That's due to its popularity, its outlier nature when compared to the bulk of other television media, and the particular type of bias it exhibits. The type of people likely to create a Youtube channel to show us Fox fabrications are unlikely to have a problem with the slant of MSNBC reporting.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

Ahahaha, who did that study, Fox? Nobody lies half as much as Fox. No other news outlet has given the finger to actual reporting as much as Fox has. And given Fox's popularity, why haven't its viewers set up their own youtube channels showing how the "lamestream media" (their words for everything non-Fox) lies? It is because the rest of the media does not lie nearly as much. All the mainstream media are owned by large corporations, and serve corporate interests, even MSNBC. That is why Morning Joe is still on then air, but Olbermann is not. Corporate media are all biased in favor of the corporate agenda, serving the 10 percent of citizens that own 90 percent of the country. You and I aren't in that top ten percent (I'm guessing you make less than a quarter million a year?) so, we do not really have any media in this country that speak on our behalf.

There is nothing equivalent to Fox News anywhere else in the western world. It is more akin to the government run propaganda outlet of some third world dictatorship.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[h4rr4r]

Left bias?
Are you fucking kidding? They have a center right pro corporate bias.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[h4rr4r]

Please show me this left or liberal media bias. All media in the USA seems to be center right(MSNBC, CNN) to far right (Fox News).

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Latinhypercube]

Apples path to the dark side is now complete

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[mosb1000]

He may have been referring to the "MS" in "MSNBC".

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[h4rr4r]

It used to be a highly regarded publication, now it is just one more News Corp garbage echo chamber rag.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[DragonWriter]

I'm not sure why Apple would want to get involved in this manner with the greatest evil in our world today, News Corp.

You aren't? I thought its obvious: money.

If they want to make an app for the iPad, that's fine, but I don't see why Apple would want to publicize this new app as forging some kind of relationship between the two companies.

Because they want other publishers to take a look at what the Daily offers for News Corp and also choose to do the same kind of thing partnering with Apple.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[aristotle-dude]

This is exactly how I feel. What in the world would make you want to be a purveyor of obviously one sided misinformation?

Right, they should have teamed up with the Huffington Post or some other crackpot blog. /SARCASM

Seriously, you should consult multiple sources to get the whole story and make of your own damn mind. Don't just listen to sources that match your own narrow world view. You should also consider that there is a difference between editorialized opinion peaces and reporting on the "news". News should be relatively unbiased as it is supposed to be a retelling of facts and eye witness accounts.

But don't let me stop you from believing the conspiracy theories.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[DragonWriter]

But there is a "Liberal Media" Problem

Evidence?

You spend your whole post providing an explanation for the cause of a "problem" which you provide no reason to believe actually exists.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[osgeek]

Like I said, go figure.

As has been reported, Olbermann is off the air because he doesn't play well with others. I mean, did he alienate his "corporate overlords" when he was at ESPN also? I guess his journalistic integrity reporting sports news ran counter to the corporate agenda? From what I've read he's obnoxious with everyone, so it's no surprise that he got canned.

Being an atheist and generally socially liberal person, I have lots of problems with Fox news. I'm not so blinded by those problems that I don't see similar problems from other media outlets. Personally, I feel more informed by following a variety of news sources including Fox.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Ah, yes and your source of claiming continuous lies is one lawsuit with your slanted opinion of. When you can provide real evidence that Fox, knowingly AND continually lies then you'll have merit. Try to back it up with some actual data.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Murdock supported Blair in the UK for a couple of terms and in the last election in the US gave the most of his money to Hillary Clinton. He truly is an evil man.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[MTTECHYBOY]

It is very simple - they are both in it just for the Money -

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Viceice]

One might go so far as to argue that Apple IS one of the greatest evils in the world today. Remember that when you buy an iDevice, you are actually paying them a premium for the privilege to access their revenue generation system (Give them more money) on their terms.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Patch86]

Left wing bias in the media? I wish the UK had that problem.

Established right wing newspapers in the UK: The Sun, The Daily Star, The Daily Express, The Daily Mail, The Daily Telegraph, The Financial Times, The Times.

Established left wing or centrist papers: The Daily Mirror, The Guardian, The Independent. The latter two are the two daily nationals with the smallest circulation.

It's beside the point though. American conceptions of "left wing" are hilariously out. American's like to think of the Republicans as the right wing party, Democrats as the left wing one, and their flag-bearing media supporters as similarly right/left aligned. In Europe, the Democrats would be considered a conservative right wing party, the Republicans a hard right wing one. God only knows how you'd classify the Tea Party supporters; "hard right" somehow doesn't seem enough.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[shadowknot]

I honestly think that people (myself included), lack the ability to be objective when assessing the bias of news sources. /. is, for the most part, a pretty center-left place so it is unsurprising that the comments above are outraged that Apple would partner with a source the perceive as biased toward a side they do not agree with. As someone who is more conservative/libertarian leaning I see left wing bias in MSNBC's coverage all the time but this could easily be a product of my political persuasion. I think that if all of you spitting vitriol above about evil liars and biased coverage on Fox would take the time to assess your opinion taking into account your political leanings you may come to the same conclusion.

To summarize, I am not saying Fox is not biased but you can't conclude that they are the only one with a bias. It's just a bias in a direction diametrically opposed to yours.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[lennier]

I'm not sure why Apple would want to get involved in this manner with the greatest evil in our world today, News Corp.

Because they don't want to settle for being the second-greatest? ;)

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[nospam007]

"God only knows how you'd classify the Tea Party supporters; "hard right" somehow doesn't seem enough."

They'd be the NeoNazis,

"Neo-Nazis are known to attack and harass Jews, African Americans, Asian Americans, Latinos, Arab Americans, Native Americans, homosexuals, Catholics, and people with different political or religious opinions."
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Neo-Nazism#United_States

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Stupid people and their money are more easily parted.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S._Robert_Lichter#Criticism_and_Response

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Center_for_media_and_public_affairs#Funding

Wow, so a media watchdog group founded by a conservative ex Fox News contributor and funded by conservative groups says Fox is the least biased. Go figure!

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=2

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_News_Channel_controversies

http://mediamatters.org/search/tag/fox_news_channel

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

You and I don't have to agree ideologically with News Corp, but this is a numbers game making this a huge win for Apple.

Fox News is popular in terms of numbers, but highly polarizing. This is only a "huge win for Apple" if its market overlaps significantly with News Corps' audience.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Romancer]

They are the gatekeepers for the masses. If Google were altering search results for Egypt because of its political beliefs and a large portion of the population were thus kept ignorant of facts or at a minimum, oblivious of opposing opinions because of the filtering; the damage caused could be much more wide spread and dangerous than the incidents themselves. Remember, the slow steady changes are hardest to guard against. The tides of public knowledge and opinion can be diverted slowly to great effect and with horrible consequences. I think that it's a fair warning that if news organizations are not the greatest threat of evil today, then they have too much control of what we are allowed to see without any regulation of real content or mandate to provide the not-so-often fair and balanced reporting that almost all claim.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

What makes you think Slashdot is center-left? It's not far right, I'll give you that, but based on the moderation of comments that I have observed, Slashdot's readership approximates a bell curve centered over, well, political centrism. If anything I would say that Slashdot's readership is generally fiscally conservative, socially liberal, with a much larger percentage of far right wing "libertarians" than you would see in most places.

Just because people here are not falling all over themselves praising your favored ideology does not mean they are leftists. Maybe you are more right wing than the average?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Probably not. I'm thinking apple's primary audience is not middle aged to old aged republicans. Nice try, however. Both corporations hold similar beliefs about locking down content with DRM and entrapping consumers.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

The Conservative will say well lets leave it as the fix could be worse then the problem.

How right you are, for example:

Immigrants: Lets leave them alone!
Existing government regulations: No need to fix this, the fix might be worse than the problem
Current levels of taxation: Can't change this, might cause problems.
Abortion rights: leave it alone, Roe v. Wade settled it.
Medicare: Don't want to make things worse, leave it alone.
Social Security: Any change here might screw things up.

Yes, conservatism, the philosophy of "leave it alone, you might break it. Unless changing it could make the rich even richer, in which case, fuck it! Change it all."

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Max Littlemore]

Can't comment on their bias not being in the US, but I do notice that for most Americans, left wing is anything to the left of what the rest of the world calls centre-right.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

the greatest evil in our world today

I agree that News Corp is evil, but it's hard to call them the "greatest evil in our world today".

Yes, when governments imprison people without trial, torture people, shoot unarmed citizens, encourage companies to fire people for their political views, build a massive surveillance state, etc etc, News Corp is there to cheer them on, hire on their political leaders, and propagandize the population into going along with these measures. But they aren't the ones actually doing it. They are part of the machine, but they aren't the machine, and they definitely aren't the ones controlling the machine.

Your totally right, its the governments, not their cheerleaders that are most responsible, but there is certainly an argument that News corp has been acting in the US, UK and Australia to utterly distory and corrupt the political discussions. Between Fox's loony cheerleading of the unhinged teaparty movement, Newscorps utterly asshole-ish hatchet jobs on the Labor and Greens parties (right down to gloating in an editorial about how they will crush the greens) and the vile racist shit the UK newscorp newspapers have been printing , its pretty clear that Rupert Murdoch is absolutely dedicated to abusing entire countries political processes to maintain governments who will reduce his tax burden. Which would be fine, in a democratic sense, if it was done honestly, but newscorp & fox seem to be perfectly comfortable lying through their teeth about things to achieve that, and thats whats so worrying.

If the Americans decide to vote Obama out for the Republicans, well thats their choice, but its damn dangerous if that happens because half the population has been brainwashed into believing their first black president is a Kenyan islamic muslim who works for soros and, uh, whatever beck is crazying on about this week, because the counter-president to that can only be an insane bircherite conspiracy theorist, and THAT is going to be profoundly harmful to world peace and american prosperity.

Newscorp might not be the devil, but the devil needs a PR guy to help darken the skies, and thats where Murdoch fits in.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[dontmakemethink]

"The Machine" is made up of willing participants. Without control over the media, The Machine can't operate effectively, so their role is integral and inseverable. They definitely are The Machine, as are others. They are the greatest evil in our world today, as are others.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Max Littlemore]

go google rupert murdoch failures and the list is amazing.

Yup. We are glad to be rid of him... (except he does still own a few papers here, but none that any sane person actually believes to be factual). Shit, even his own mum doesn't like him....

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

That works both ways. They are both the two greatest evils in our world today

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[ArcherB]

Please, when you make an outrageous claim such as implying that FoxNews lies as much as MSNBC, try to back it up with some data from a reputable site. Not one that sports the video "Food Secrets Revealed" with a picture of "NWO Food and Pharmacy". I guess neither Alex Jones nor George Noory had an article to your liking or are they just corporate shills being controlled by government satellites and contrails?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[ArcherB]

rupert murdoch is basically the heart and soul of everything that's wrong with things online for the past 10 years, so I don't find i wrong to put a focus on things he owns as being the problem.

go google rupert murdoch failures and the list is amazing. a rich man who does nothing right, is too old for his times, and thinks making artificial scarcity is the way to run a business.

Is that the same Rupert Murdoch that donated to the Hillary Clinton campaign?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

You know I'm not making a joke, ArcherB. Don't pretend you don't know me. Don't play dumb. Oh wait... You also claim that any MSNBC commentator is left of Marx. How so? I mean, seriously, I would love to see your cogent analysis showing how modern American commentators on a corporate owned station are left of Marx.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

I'm not familiar with the conspiracies you mention, could you enlighten me?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Javit]

Seems hypocritical to dismiss osgeek's cited info as coming from a biased organization if you're going to cite biased organizations yourself.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

As a follow up, I'd like to ask if you believe that Rupert Murdoch is an immortal blood sucking man whore who eats babies?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[osgeek]

That's an ad hominem. If you read the links you posted, you'll see that their studies are cited by liberal and conservative organizations with several media outlets acknowledging their nonpartisanship.

Their biggest critic seems to be FAIR, and if you go to FAIR's wikipedia page, you'll see where they're criticized for their own liberal bias.

Look, I don't want to defend Fox too ardently. I'm not exactly a fan of their commentators - but when I see polemic like you posted, I feel a need to point it out. The truth is that Fox is the other side of a coin that has more than adequate representation in the rest of the media. If you dismiss Fox without dismissing MSNBC then you're a hypocrite.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[rtb61]

Hmm, yeah that liberal media fantasy land, all owned by conservative corporations but filled with people that disobey editorial instruction 24/7 with out getting fired, "we believe". Liberal media is simply a mass media marketing lie targeted at any story, I repeat, absolutely any story that paints pseudo conservatives in a bad light (they have not been actual conservatives for more than two decades but rather ruthless exploiters and their puppets).

Apparently 'liberal media' is presenting at least some of the truth and not censoring it all out of public consciousness. You possibly might be thinking of the liberal internet problem, where truth gets centre stage and the lies whilst still out there in force gets shoved out of the light to skulk in the shadows as soon as the real facts are obtained and released (which last far, far longer than the old 48 hour media cycle, months and years and the truth still bites back big time). When it comes to the internet Fox not-News is a big loser, with tiny little actual 'liberal media' companies well and truly kicking it's ass in terms of internet ratings (multi-billlion dollar company and it's internet ratings are a joke).

Apple is trying to improve sales of iPad by appealing to the conservative market and News corp is trying to slime into some of Apples marketing cool. Likely results double fail, conservatives tend to be cheap greedy buggers who wont part with cash and News corp will simply tarnish Apples reputation.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

the greatest evil in our world today

Just to set the record straight. The greatest evil in our world today is satan .i.e. The devil or old nick.http://www.angelfire.com/mi/dinosaurs/lucifer.html

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[a-yz]

The end of that last post, stating you are either making a joke or you are a moron, is much like Fox News itself. Their stories basically lead you into one of several choices ("we report..") and then you are encouraged to choose one ("...you decide"). Many of their routine viewers don't even realize that they are false choices and they will just blindly choose to go with one. Of course, either choice, if accepted by the viewer, directly serves the interests of those who run News Corp.

I was in a waiting room several days ago, and Fox News was on the TV and sure enough they did the same thing the poster above does - they gave two false choices. "Michelle Bachman - abused by the press or a victim of sexism?". Of course, free people are free to not choose bogus choices, they can use critical thinking skills and make up their own mind without TV 'helping' them to decide.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

You're stupid. MSNBC has a stated left wing leaning, just as Fox has a right. I'm not sure why you're rambling on about facts, both stations are mostly opiniontainment.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

You're probably one of those guys who thinks all the dummies watching WWF wrestling think it's real, right?

But go on thinking everyone who doesn't jump on the yuk-yuk wagon mocking Fox viewers is some silly goose who thinks Fox isn't largely opinion, and often idiotic opinion.

What's even funnier is you defend MSNBC as if it's the next coming of Walter Conkrite. That makes me think maybe _you_ think WWF wrestling is real. It's too bad Obamaman got kicked off, huh, he was a bastion of fact and objectivity ahahahaha.

Dipshit.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

You're full of shit, yet again. Obamaman was the worst, but far from the only. How's this for "facts"?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

Yeah, the problem is I'm smarter than you. So anything you see through I most certainly do as well. I listen to Fox largely for the entertainment value, though they do have bits of news interspersed throughout the (obvious) opiniontainment.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

Right. Obamaman and all the other sacks of shit on that channel are _totally_ center right! Rachel Maddow, ahahaha. I love pop intellectualism, it cracks me up. I wonder if she even needs those laughable glasses.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[RightSaidFred99]

And some random, stupid asshole on Slashdot claims they are the least biased while MSNBC is a stronghold of center-objective media values. Go figure!

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

How blind are you that you believe Apple is not already a direct contributor to this kind of self-affirming bias? Seriously? You see NO BENEFIT to Apple at all, with its hordes of poorly tech-literate followers willing to pay small sums of money for silly apps PC users get for free, in forging a relationship where these same users can pay for news everyone else gets for free?

Obviously one sided information... let me just quote some things here...

"iPhone 4: this changes everything, again"
iChat: the worlds first video utility that makes it easy to to keep in touch

Both statements made by Apple, both entirely false and self-fellating.

You are a fool of the highest calibre. Enjoy your iPad, iTunes subscription and iPhone. Your trendiness makes up for your stupidity, honestly.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah - fuck those writers who want to get paid for writing stuff.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[YeeHaW_Jelte]

"God only knows how you'd classify the Tea Party supporters; "hard right" somehow doesn't seem enough."

I'm not even American, but by what I've heard of this Tea Party, I'd almost call them anarchists. If you take the anti-government stance far enough, that's where you end up.

Also, the latest thing I heard them blabber about was this variation of the Starve-the-Beast idiom, which essentially meant they would forfeit on (international) debt payments and such ... that would be the equivalent of the classic old anarchist bom under 'The System'.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me start by saying I don't actually agree that Fox is the greatest evil in our world today; it's just too hyperbolic for me. But a counter-argument to you:

People aren't that powerful. They're made powerful. Even the strongest man in the world could be felled by an organized effort, and frankly it wouldn't even require THAT much of an organized effort.

The reason governments can imprison people without trial, torture people, shoot unarmed citizens, encourage companies to fire people for their political views, build a massive surveillance state, etc etc, is that they are permitted to; they aren't cast down for it. Even in the case of the most brutal dictatorships, it is ultimately a few evil men who could easily be felled -- they're not because they are enabled. In that case by the approval of the men underneath them. In democracies, by the results of the polls.

Fox (News Corp) is enabling such behavior. Not only can they pick and choose what to report as news at all, but they can slant the discusion. "Well I used to think torture was bad, but look at all these intelligent men in nice suits who defend it! They really seem to known what they're talking about." Whether it changes a mind or simply gives the person excuse not to care, it is dangerous. Further, they disguise what amounts basically to opinion in the guise of authority. Composed men and women in expensive suits talking to "experts" with the backing of multi-billion dollar companies, everything they do is designed to make you feel you should listen to them because after listening to experts from both sides, golly gee, this is "the truth." And they're presenting this to literally millions upon millions of people every single day. It is enabling on an epic scale.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Rennt]

News should be relatively unbiased as it is supposed to be a retelling of facts and eye witness accounts.

Agreed. So that's News Corp out of the picture. Good grief, Apple would be better off with a Google News type "app".

Wait, don't they already have one of those?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[AmiMoJo]

Murdoch media is not about news, it is about opinion and anger.

Newspapers always lag behind TV and internet news because they have to be printed and delivered. Therefore they can't rely on simply reporting news because by the time they publish it is a day old. Instead they focus on opinion, investigations and making people angry. People like being angry, it is comfortable to have someone to hate and blame for all the ills in the world.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[boxwood]

... and thinks making artificial scarcity is the way to run a business.

Seems to work well for DeBeers.

Besides that since duplicating copyrighted material is trivial, all media companies are running businesses based on artificial scarcity... artificial scarcity backed by IP laws.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[boxwood]

traditionally its zombies that eat people's brains.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[dwightk]

if only we were so lucky that News Corp was the greatest evil in our world today

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

a rich man who does nothing right, is too old for his times, and thinks making artificial scarcity is the way to run a business... Steve Jobs?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

Prove otherwise. Explain "Morning Joe" while you are at it.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

Aw, come on! You know the answer to this one, it's one the right uses all the time. Repeat after me: "It was just a joke!" What thin skin you guys have.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

I'm not defending MSNBC. There is nothing to defend.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

MSNBC's idea of "left wing" is center right to me. That's who you're dealing with here: someone who seriously thinks MSNBC is center right. What does that make me, I wonder?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

Fox is not the other side of any coin. There is nothing even close to Fox on the left.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

What' bias? Oh, I'm sorry, did one of my sources work for the institution they are defending?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[tehcyder]

These guys are to the left of Marx for Pete's sake!

I misread this as "to the left of Mars" and thought this must be some Futurama joke or something.. Then I reread it and decided that, as you are clearly not on speaking terms with reality, it didn't matter anyway.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[tehcyder]

. /. is, for the most part, a pretty center-left place

Only if you use the US definition of "left wing" to mean anyone more moderate than Joseph Goebbels.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[tehcyder]

I'm not even American, but by what I've heard of this Tea Party, I'd almost call them anarchists. If you take the anti-government stance far enough, that's where you end up.

That's traducing the good name of anarchism.

The Tea Party are the equivalent of the ultra-nationalist, xenophobic, ultra-convservative parties in Europe that tend towards being Neo-Nazi.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[luk3Z]

You don't know why? For money of course... Anyway all Corps belong to private people are NOT objective media (they are all false). You can find objective informations in the internet (infos easy to verify on few sites).

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Just Another Poster]

False equivalency. Fox News has been proven, again and again, to lie on air nearly continuously. Heck, they fought and won a lawsuit defending their right to lie on air.

I want to see court transcripts clearly showing that Fox attorneys argued that the station in question had the right to lie.

What actually happened was that the two reporters who filed the lawsuit, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, were probably trying to do a hatchet-job on Monsanto. When the Fox affiliate station asked them to balance it out with Monsanto's side of the story, they refused, stalled for nine months, and were fired. They sued under a Florida "whistleblower" statute, and lost. The court did not decide whether or not the report was truthful. The court did not say that WTVT, the Fox affiliate, had a right to lie. The court simply said that no law was broken. There is no evidence that WTVT asked Wilson and Akre to lie.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[rrohbeck]

This is exactly how I feel. What in the world would make you want to be a purveyor of obviously one sided misinformation?

Money?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

A hatchet job on Monsanto? Allow me to quote:

According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts. Fox editors then tried to force Akre and Wilson to continue to produce the distorted story. When they refused and threatened to report Fox's actions to the FCC, they were both fired.(Project Censored #12 1997)

Yeah, that's what it was, the evil and more than likely sekrit librul reporters were attacking the poor, friendly corporation with a big old hatchet, and when Fox stepped in to protect poor old Monsanto. Poor, poor Fox and Monsanto lost their case. But luckily they had lots and lots of money to fight the evil sekrit librul reporters with! So they appealed, and during their appeal they specifically argued thusly:

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akre’s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so. After the appeal verdict WTVT general manager Bob Linger commented, “It’s vindication for WTVT, and we’re very pleased It’s the case we’ve been making for two years. She never had a legal claim.”

Just another poster? Just another defender of the status quo pandering to the owning class in hopes of joining the club. They laugh at you, you know, and will never let you in their club because you are a fucking peasant, to be used and used up and thrown away. They don't even have the decency to feel grateful when you defend them. They despise you for your weakness and your inability to fight for your own interests. If you fought them, they would at least respect you a little.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Anonymous Coward]

The true question is, did making scarcity work for him? Looks like it did...

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Javit]

I didn't say that. I said they're biased. Media Matters for America and FAIR are progressive media watchdog groups. I think it would be fair of you (pardon the pun) to find other sources if you're going to criticize citations to organizations with a stated or likely conservative bias.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[spun]

A stated or likely Fox News Bias. Because of the fact that the founder worked there. Nothing to do with conservatism, simply cronyism. Therefore, I only need to find non-cronyism organizations. Which I have done.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Javit]

You would, then, give fair consideration to research from a known conservative organization so long as the subject doesn't involve the former employer of a founder (or similar)? Your original response seems to indicate a hostility to the research of known-biased organizations.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Jojie_T]

Does it matter what all the dummies watching WWF think? They're dummies. Let them be.

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Jojie_T]

If you're so smart as you claim, how can you not see entertainment value on MSNBC?

Re:Evil reaches the iPad

[Just Another Poster]

A hatchet job on Monsanto? Allow me to quote:

According to Akre and Wilson, the station was initially very excited about the series. But within a week, Fox executives and their attorneys wanted the reporters to use statements from Monsanto representatives that the reporters knew were false and to make other revisions to the story that were in direct conflict with the facts.

Without copies of the transcripts and proposed revisions, the assertions of the reporters and Project Censored are merely statements of opinion.

During their appeal, FOX asserted that there are no written rules against distorting news in the media. They argued that, under the First Amendment, broadcasters have the right to lie or deliberately distort news reports on public airwaves. Fox attorneys did not dispute Akreâ(TM)s claim that they pressured her to broadcast a false story, they simply maintained that it was their right to do so.

Again, I want to see actual court transcripts detailing the arguments of the Fox attorneys.

Just another poster? Just another defender of the status quo pandering to the owning class in hopes of joining the club. They laugh at you, you know, and will never let you in their club because you are a fucking peasant, to be used and used up and thrown away.

Better to be "used" than murdered, which is what happens when those much like yourself achieve the absolute power they seek.

Walled Paradice.

[Beelzebud]

Now the people telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use, partner with people that tell you exactly what to think.

1984 indeed. iTelescreen.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[H0p313ss]

Now the people telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use, partner with people that tell you exactly what to think.

1984 indeed. iTelescreen.

1) Total BS, you can choose not to buy the iPad, or the app, or you can use one of a plethora of other news apps including anything with a website.

2) Paradise

FUD much?

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Anonymous Coward]

On the plus side, as long as we have a paradice, we can always play craps.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude... I pooped. I'm telling you that is stinks. It stinks reeeeaaaly awful.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering the type of people who are likely to buy the ipad: [http://apple.slashdot.org/story/10/07/27/1234212/iPad-Owners-Are-Selfish-Elites]

Perhaps it's a love triangle made in heaven.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[hb79]

> you can choose not to buy the iPad, or the app, or you can use one of a plethora of other news apps including anything with a website.

I thought that was the definition of sheeple; that they do not choose.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Arancaytar]

What's a pair o' dice got to do with it?

Re:Walled Paradice.

[zach_the_lizard]

They chose to follow the leader. We humans at least have the capacity to choose that.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[nine-times]

Yeah, honestly my first response is, "Can we get this from a reputable news outlet?" Honestly I don't mind paying for some kind of news subscription if it's well done and useful, but I don't trust News Corp.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[openfrog]

Now the people telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use, partner with people that tell you exactly what to think.

1984 indeed. iTelescreen.

Agreed. The 1984 Apple commercial, originally shown in... 1984 during the SuperBowl and beautifully shot by Ridley Scott is worth watching again. I am actually surprised at how little Apple value the goodwill they have generated over the years as the small guy holding on against IBM and Microsoft. It seems to me that they are forfeiting vast opportunities over short term gains:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8

Re:Walled Paradice.

[The Fanta Menace]

A choice between two leaders isn't much of a choice.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Right. Because the New York Times doesn't have an agenda.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[H0p313ss]

A choice between two leaders isn't much of a choice.

Somebody needs to explain to me in short simple words how this is relevant to YET ANOTHER news app?

Re:Walled Paradice.

[dfghjk]

Here's a comment that genuinely earns it's insightful rating.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because you can choose something else doesn't mean the first choice gets better. Or even that the majority will follow. You can choose to vote independent or green. You can choose to not pay your taxes too. You can choose a lot of things, even to use that option to explain why the supper massive mega corporations aren't actually doing anything bad. But the problem is that they are not doing everything in the interest of the people, they shouldn't, they are by nature a company in it for the profits, and that's fine too. Until the mergers encompass so much of a majority and the small good deeds they do for PR start to be crushed by the agendas and personal goals of the upper echelons and the masses that could have chosen something else but bought into it instead since it was the best option, trademarked and patent portfolio protected, and are left with the only options left to such people. None. Since they cannot think on their own now. Just remember, they could have chosen better. And that makes it ok for you to watch it happen.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Alanis Morissette]

My toaster can only make toast out of the box without some serious modding. Thankfully there are a whole lot of other choices if I don't like the restrictions imposed on me by the evil toaster company.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[LodCrappo]

When Apple said 1984 wouldn't be like "1984", everyone just assumed this was because Apple was against the idea.

As it turns out, they are totally into it. They just didn't have the tech ready then.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[node 3]

Now the people telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use

Apple does no such thing. The *only* thing they do is disallow a small number of apps. It's up to the developers what apps are made available, and what apps the user decides to buy or download.

Google does the same thing to a lesser extent. They've actually used their remote kill switch on apps, and they've booted apps from their store. Would you make the same statement were Android to ever get The Daily?

Anyway, I guess "now the people who refuse to carry *some* apps on their single-source app store..." doesn't have the same ring to it.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Rennt]

Now the people telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use

Apple does no such thing.

Ho ho, yes they do. Unless Steve "If you want porn buy android" Jobs doesn't count as people.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[Anonymous Coward]

good to have an apple cocksucker here to let us know that actually, apple aren't that bad after all, even with the whole murdoch business.

you people make me laugh.

in the meantime the rest of the world waits for jobs to die and his vile company to go with him.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[rrohbeck]

Come on, it's totally not like the movie. Everything is wireless and portable in reality.

Re:Walled Paradice.

[node 3]

Now the people telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use

Apple does no such thing.

Ho ho, yes they do. Unless Steve "If you want porn buy android" Jobs doesn't count as people.

Do you know that there's a huge difference between not carrying porn, and "telling you exactly what apps you can and can't use"? I'm telling you this right now, Steve Jobs, nor anyone else, has ever told me "exactly what apps you can and can't use". And I can, in fact, run all the porn I want on my iPhone, including apps, if I so desire. I can do so with Apple's permission by buying a developer key, or I can do so without their permission by jailbreaking.

That the App Store is both curated and the main source for apps is a valid criticism. That that means Apple is controlling its users is not. Every time a nerd goes on a rant like this, it comes across like insane babbling to normal people. You may as well rail against Disney's evil controlling nature for not showing porn on the Disney Channel. No one ever says something like, "Best Buy tells you exactly what you can and can't buy" just because they only carry specific items, or that a museum tells you what are you can and can't see, etc.

In fact, I would wager large amounts of money that most people who say this about Apple actually have non-Apple approved software on their phones. The very people who make this claim are counterexamples that actually disprove their claim!

Re:Walled Paradice.

[node 3]

You realize that your resorting to stupid sexual insults demonstrates you have absolutely no substance to your argument, right? That your position is based entirely on ignorance and emotion, or you'd be able to make a cogent argument.

Your last line is especially insane. If you think there are very many people who think Apple is vile, and are waiting for Jobs to die, you are on the far extreme end of madness. People love their Apple products, and think Jobs has done fantastic things with his company. The set of people who fit your last statement are a lunatic fringe.

And yes, I realize responding to you is a waste of time, but what the hell, every now and then someone's got to point out the obvious when someone else is being an idiot.

New Corp. and Apple Unveil The Daily

[Anonymous Coward]

> New Corp. and Apple Unveil The Daily

News*

Re:New Corp. and Apple Unveil The Daily

[Anonymous Coward]

Propaganda*

Unthinkable Innovations...

[gnarfel]

I'm sure these 'unthinkable innovations' will include such wonders as...

• Printed, movable type! Quick, hide that lest the serfs see it...
• Embedded images
• Hyperlinking!
• Moving pictures, aka animation!
• [insert other web 0.1 technology here...]

It seems like marketing speak for 'We found out that newspapers aren't making money anymore. Let's hop on this new bandwagon!'

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[Anonymous Coward]

. Printed, movable adverts! Quick, hide that lest the serfs see it...

. Embedded adverts

. Hyperlink adverts!

. Moving pictures, aka animated adverts.

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, HYPERLINKING .

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[Red Flayer]

I'm sure these 'unthinkable innovations' will include such wonders as...

When I read "unthinkable innovations" I figured it'd be more along the lines of He Who Lies Dead But Dreaming partnering up with Apple, thusly conjoining two of the five greatest evils ever to beset this Universe.

FWIW, the idea that Murdoch could be an acolyte of Cthulhu doesn't seem that far-fetched, anyway. I mean, while he's a bit easier to cast your gaze upon than one of the Old Ones, something's not quite right with that man.

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[Polumna]

I mean, while he's a bit easier to cast your gaze upon than one of the Old Ones

You think so? I know I lose some of my sanity every time I see him.

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[blair1q]

"We found out people were getting information from these devices, instead of through our filters."

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[Drishmung]

I mean, while he's a bit easier to cast your gaze upon than one of the Old Ones

If you do in fact speak from experience, then you are, presumably, irredeemably insane.

Re:Unthinkable Innovations...

[irockash]

I'm sure these 'unthinkable innovations' will include such wonders as...

• Printed, movable type! Quick, hide that lest the serifs see it...

I think that also works.

"unthinkable innovations?"

[Anonymous Coward]

I think you meant unthinkable ways to stifle innovations.

FTFY.

Re:"unthinkable innovations?"

[_Sprocket_]

"Unthinkable" in this instance roughly translates to "we want you to stop thinking." Says Murdoch - take THAT, Internet!

Unrelated to TFA

[Joe Snipe]

Click to become a fan of slashdot on facebook? Really?

Re:Unrelated to TFA

[click2005]

Yes!!! Why converse with slashdotters on slashdot when you can chat on Facebook.

Re:Unrelated to TFA

[Red Flayer]

Click to become a fan of slashdot on facebook? Really?

Yes.

If you click to become a fan of slashdot on Facebook by the end of this month, you'll be given free lifetime membership to slashdot when they roll out slashdot v4.0 in March.

Fortunately, all the bugs and UI problems will be fixed in v4.0. Unfortunately, this is because v4.0 is when slashdot moves entirely to Facebook, and all stories and comments will be posts on Slashdot's Facebook wall.

Re:Unrelated to TFA

[Anonymous Coward]

in soviet russian, click here to post a comment about facebook on slashdot

Re:Unrelated to TFA

[rrohbeck]

Slashdot doesn't have pics of hot chicks.

Strangest way I've ever heard "no innovation here"

[xxxJonBoyxxx]

Rupert Murdoch said that The Daily offers 'unthinkable innovations' to the world of publishing.

In other words, if there are innovations here, they haven't thought of them yet.

All kidding aside, it looks like a return to the "hypercard" fixed width and height presentation that's been on the backburner since the web first beat out print in popularity. (Web articles typically scroll up/down, of course.) In that case, the innovation is "we finally found a way to get you to page through an article with all the ads again - no more 'printable version' for you - muh ha ha ha ha ha!"

New Corp?

[ThePolkapunk]

What's so new about this corp?

Do you perhaps mean NewS corp?

Re:New Corp?

[robot256]

I think I like "New$ Corp" better.

Re:New Corp?

[Anonymous Coward]

HAHAHA! Now that, that my friend is fresh.

Mmm, so fresh.

Re:New Corp?

[theY4Kman]

Frankly, I want the Old Corp back.

Re:New Corp?

[owlnation]

I always tend to think of if more as "New Corpse". They do love their fear-soaked leading stories after all.

Re:New Corp?

[robot256]

One can only hope that in the 21st century they will become known as News Corpse. But that may be too much to ask.

Rupert Murdoch

[Anonymous Coward]

Found someone stupid enough to buy his bullshit.

Congrats. That's pretty good.

Really. This was the fucktard that wanted to remove his crap from the google search engine. Because they're 'stealing' his air or something.

What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[tomhudson]

Nope, no such luck - just another "It passed the spilling chucker, so we're good" story headline.

D a r n e d !

Rupert Murdoch said that The Daily offers "unthinkable innovations" to the world of publishing.

"New times demand new journalism," Murdoch said. "The devices that modern engineering has put in our hands demand a new service, edited and designed specifically for them."

It doesn't offer "unthinkable innovations" - after all, someone obviously thought of them.

How about a real innovation for Murdoch papers - like reporting the news with a bit less bias?

-- Barbara

Call me when its a real news org.

[Methos137]

News Corp and Apple. What they couldn't get the Chinese Government to sign off too? Call me when it is a news source someone will really care about or something that can't already be done for free.

Re:Call me when its a real news org.

[Anonymous Coward]

Funny how complain how you complain they aren't a real news organization on slashdot, a site that can't even spell News Corp. right.

rupert murdoch bought myspace

[Dan667]

he must be a technology genuis. Not like myspace just laid off half their work force.

Re:rupert murdoch bought myspace

[rrohbeck]

Yes. He should buy Facebook now.

Re:What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[Anonymous Coward]

Reality has a not-so-well-known conservative bias.

'unthinkable innovations'

[macraig]

Lemme guess: all of those innovations involve revenue generation strategy, right? Knowing Murdoch, it couldn't possibly mean anything else.

Re:'unthinkable innovations'

[Anonymous Coward]

Why shouldn't he make money? Making money isn't bad.
Using the element of fear, uncertainty, and doubt to sell you underlying political message is what I have a problem with

Re:'unthinkable innovations'

[Anonymous Coward]

It gets even better! The press event was probably held within the Guggenheim's 70-seat "News Corporation New Media Theater".
http://www.guggenheim.org/new-york/about/host-an-event

Just say that a few times - "News Corporation New Media Theater". It'd be an article tag if they hadn't made the preemptive strike. Classic Orwell doublethink.

Re:'unthinkable innovations'

[Locke2005]

You can also make money dealing in prostitution, drugs, extortion, and murder... do you want to reconsider your claim that making money is ALWAYS a good thing?

Re:'unthinkable innovations'

[imric]

*shrug* Fear, uncertainty, doubt, hatred - ALL outsell bravery, certainty, confidence and love.

Murdoch simply holds money in higher regard than honesty.

Right-wingers of all stripes (economic, religious, narcissistic, etc) love that pragmatic approach. After all, the Supreme Court clarified the Constitutional right to free speech (and it's a natural right) means that he can peddle bile and call it news with impunity... He's just following the market, folks. Is it Murdoch's fault so many Americans fight so hard for the right to be venal? That so many Americans want us to have a two-class system with themselves on top?

Is it Murdoch's fault that so many people (I'm looking at you, Libertarians) get their economic theory from '60s Bugs Bunny cartoons?

It's CERTAINLY not his fault that so many Americans hold science in contempt, and think that legislation trumps both mathematics and natural law.

Is it his fault that so many here believe to their core that they are better than anyone else? That all other people should be glad at our attempts to dominate them?

Is it Murdoch's fault when he panders to the tastes of a nation in serious economic trouble, threatened only by starving tribesmen and parts of underdeveloped/third-world nations, that flirts with economic oblivion so that we have enough weapons to take on every other nation on earth at once?

Re:'unthinkable innovations'

[Necron69]

Actually, THIS Libertarian got his economic theory from studying to get an economics degree in college. How about you?

That being said, hell no, I have no interest in Murdoch's magazine. I think he'll lose a bundle on this little experiment. The genie was let out of the bottle years ago, and he just keeps trying to stuff it back in.

Necron69

Re:'unthinkable innovations'

[imric]

"Actually, THIS Libertarian got his economic theory from studying to get an economics degree in college"

Well good! You are more likely to know something on the subject, then. (It's no guarantee though - I remember when supply-side economics was sold to students as gospel) Not me though. Math, Physics and Philosophy were my majors. I've been watching 'Libertarians' try to isolate government from the market for many years. That's not possible; in a democracy, even a Republican democracy where the people are isolated by one remove from direct voting. When the people are abused (people are a vital part of almost all large markets, I'm sure you'll agree) the people correct that market through regulation. Most of the free marketeers and Libertarians I've spoken with over the years tend to invent assumptions to prop up their dogma; namely that all things are luxuries (when you are staring at death or starvation there IS no balance between supply and demand for example), or that segments of the market are infinite (you can always go and get another job), or deny that the goal of all business is monopoly (heck many of the libertarians I've spoken to deny that there is any such thing as a monopoly) or blather on about unions not being a free market phenomena - as if they are anti-capitalist, somehow (when, once again, they are the end product of 'self-regulating' business abuses of the workforce). And the most hilarious are the 'Laffer drones' that conveniently ignore the other side of the Laffer curve - the side that points out that indeed if you reduce taxes BELOW the peak (37-42% IIRC) of the curve the government's revenue drops precipitously - IOW, reducing taxes to increase revenue only works to a point, and the citizens are not well served past that point.

Nope, IMO finite markets need boundaries, the boundaries are the result of businesses abusing their power, and are generally called 'laws' or 'regulations'. Without them, the market will consume itself and dry up.

The ones that cannot see that, and instead espouse Bugs Bunny econ (a never ending spiral of pay increases, production increases and price drops brought about by industry) if only the government (conveniently forgetting that government is the representation of the people's part of the market) would get out of the way. Those are the ones I find sophomoric... *smile*

Now, for up to the minute reporting on Egypt

[Anonymous Coward]

... we have "The Daily" foreign policy analyst Sarah Palin.

Re:Now, for up to the minute reporting on Egypt

[djcinsb]

She should know. I hear she can see Egypt from her house.

Re:Now, for up to the minute reporting on Egypt

[Anonymous Coward]

This Egypt, no doubt.

Re:Now, for up to the minute reporting on Egypt

[Beefslaya]

This Egypt, no doubt.

Ask Chris Matthews where the Panama Canal is....

Re:Strangest way I've ever heard "no innovation he

[Anonymous Coward]

Rupert Murdoch said that The Daily offers 'unthinkable innovations' to the world of publishing.

In other words, if there are innovations here, they haven't thought of them yet.

Funny, when I consider the term "unthinkable", I generally use it as a modifier for words like "horrors", "terror", "atrocities", etc...

Re:What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[gilroy]

How about a real innovation for Murdoch papers - like reporting the news with a bit less bias?

No, for Murdoch, that would be literally unthinkable... :)

Unthinkable innovations

[Anonymous Coward]

In the same manner as Hastur is Unspeakable.

how long?

[Anonymous Coward]

How long until the novelty effect of these "unthinkable innovations" wears off? It's just like the iPad ad on tv where you see a magazine with an embedded video.

"OMG it's like Harry Potter in an iPad"... except that I want to _read_ contents I choose from, not be imposed some lame video with (I'm sure that's around the corner too) advertisement before it plays, as we see with flash videos.

Watch them patent it.

[Ungrounded Lightning]

I think you meant unthinkable ways to stifle innovations.

Watch them patent "newspaper on a networked portable computer with display" - then use it to suppress all news reporting on the Internet.

Re:Watch them patent it.

[sorak]

I think you meant unthinkable ways to stifle innovations.

Watch them patent "newspaper on a networked portable computer with display" - then use it to suppress all news reporting on the Internet.

Wouldn't it be more like "means of transmitting content from one or more centralized network devices to another network device"?

Not trying to troll, but those patent applications are so vaguely worded that my example may seem precise by comparison.

Innovation

[grasshoppa]

I'd like less innovation, and more honesty.

The Daily has been part of the Nook since 1.0

[Anonymous Coward]

The nook has this thing called the Daily. And that's where Daily things go.

Again Apple innovates...

a chance to pay for mindphuking hypenosys

[Anonymous Coward]

what a break. as was previously mentioned, almost nothing else can happen until all the hungry/scared babies are safe/fed etc.... see you there?

Unthinkable?

[dmomo]

Indeed.

I for one...

[Baseclass]

I for one do NOT welcome our information distorting, control freak, overlords.

Re:I for one...

[BJ_Covert_Action]

By your powers combined, I am Captain Hide-the-Truth!

Re:I for one...

[Locke2005]

Not drinking the Apple Kool-Aid? There's an App for that!

Re:Strangest way I've ever heard "no innovation he

[skids]

Maybe he meant "unsinkable" but his forked tongue confused the reporter.

Is it just me...

[BadPirate]

Or does this article seem to be overhyped by the tech blogs at the moment for being such a boring piece of news?

Re:What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[skids]

Reality has a not-so-well-known conservative bias.

Well, Anonymous Cowards do, at least.

Unlikely bedfellows

[PyroMosh]

Others have called News Corp. Evil, etc. I have no love of Rupert Murdoch, and I'm inclined to agree with the sentiment to a degree, but I think it goes a bit far.

The thing is, that's my opinion. And your opinion. But you have to recognize that not everyone shares it.

That said, I am very, very surprised that Apple is in bed with News Corp. Not because I think Apple should oppose them, or because I think Apple management has any particular political ideology.

But surely Apple must recognize that News Corp. is a terrible mis-match for the large demographic for their shiny toys?

While the iPod / iPhone / iPad demographic has opened up in the past couple years, it's still largely driven by young, wealthy. tech savvy. This demographic trends opposite the direction News Corp has with it's TV and Print Publications in the past.

Unless this is a concerted effort to open up their demographic further, or unless the iPad demo has shifted from that of the iPad / iPod, I don't understand the decision to tie a signature feature to the News Corp brand.

Re:Unlikely bedfellows

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Think of it kind of like the old guy that has the hot young girlfriend. It's a symbiotic relationship. The old guy gets to use the hot young girlfriend to appear relevant, hip, and still worth noticing. The hot young girlfriend uses the old guy for money to fund her shiny toy collection.

Pay no attention to the fact that both parties are fucking other significant others perpetually. Pay no attention to the fact that neither have any love for one another. Please ignore the fact that there is no way in hell the old guy could get a blow job from the young without hottie her being written in his soon-to-be-invoked will. Nope, it's a real relationship. We promise.

Now excuse me while I go scrub my brain of some of the images that metaphor caused to blossom in my mind's eye.

Re:Unlikely bedfellows

[maxume]

I would guess that there are plenty of wealthy, not particularly tech savvy, older people. And they are a great market for the iPad and iPhone (especially the part where owning one makes them feel more tech savvy).

I would also guess that only a very small section of their market is so put off that they do not buy Apple because of the association (making it a not particularly risky move for Apple).

Re:Unlikely bedfellows

[sglewis100]

I'm not quite sure they are "in bed with" News Corp. Besides, without News Corp, when I go to NYC every other month, how would I read the Post, with it's awesome sports section? And the WSJ isn't a bad periodical. And for sure, FNC reaches an audience that was starved for cable news that fit their ideals. Whether or not you agree with it, if FNC shut down tomorrow, I'd want to open a channel just like it - lots of money there to be made!

To me, I will download it. It's free for two weeks. So I'll check it out. The IDEA, is a good one. It's been shown that newspapers and magazines are hurting, and that Tablet sales haven't made up for that. It was time for something NEW. Apps like FlipBoard show the concept is possible. If you followed the Q&A of the announcement, you'll find some things:

1) The subscription model is imminently opening up to all publishers.
2) They made reference to being able to provide the demographics to advertisers that they required to keep a premium price for ad sales.

There are some decent concepts in there. Professionally voiced over articles so you can hear a radioesque reading of stories. Tons of videos. If there is going to be something to save the newspaper industry, this might well be the MODEL. If you don't lean right, perhaps you'll want to wait for another institution's release.

I'm sure this was a great partnership. Apple needed a high profile demonstration for the model. Murdoch was willing to invest tens of millions to do a startup.

Re:Unlikely bedfellows

[ColdWetDog]

I would guess that there are plenty of wealthy, not particularly tech savvy, older people.

This. Look, if my 80 year old moderately demented mother can handle the iPad, so can Glen Beck.

Re:What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[BJ_Covert_Action]

Why do that when they can keep making money by spreading FUD and ruckus? Besides, the truth is for commies and terrorists. Real patriots take pride in their ignorance and cognitive dissonance!

Re:Strangest way I've ever heard "no innovation he

[0xdeadbeef]

Yup, frames are hot this season, it's 1998 all over again!

io9.com recently went to that format, and imagine the rest of Gawker will follow. If anyone still reads their crap, I imagine they won't be for long.

I think the future will regard "web 2.0" as a colossal failure, at least at producing a sustainable infrastructure. People tried to make applications out of a document viewer, and people tried to turn documents into applications, and all they really got out of it was a tangled mess of glue code and markup.

As much as I hate Apple's closed ecosystem, it finally made people realize that that the real problem with distributing applications is trust. The browser is a sandboxing runtime, and it succeeded by tricking people into thinking it was somehow a different category from all the other sandboxing runtimes, which they regard as slow and clunkier than native applications.

Remove the trust issues with native applications, and people are WTF do I need this browser for? All my favorite stuff is on the market!

Missing word in summary

[easyTree]

The Daily Fanboy, the digital publication designed specifically for Apple's iPad, is now available on the App Store...

FTFY :-)

Lazy bastards!

[mrcvp]

They can't even come up with something original after the words "the daily"

Re:Lazy bastards!

[Kemanorel]

Not to mention that, but isn't that a "feature" of the Nook? Will we soon see a lawsuit from Barnes & Noble over trademark issues? Maybe B&N forgot to register that particular trademark...

Oh, and yeah, FUCK Rupert Murdoch. Fuck him with a chainsaw.

Tread lightly

[Anonymous Coward]

I remember back in November, a bi-monthly Android magazine was rejected from the App store for no reason other than it was "just about Android"

In fact, here's the exact reason the app dev was given: "“You know your magazine, It’s just about Android. we can’t have that in our App Store.”

Now, you may say "So what? Of course Apple wouldn't want a magazine like that on their store." But think about it; Apple rejected a perfectly good App, for no reason other than the content it reported on. What happens if this digital newspaper publishes an unflattering report about an Apple product? Or better yet, what if they *don't* publish such a report, for no reason other than wanting to stay on good terms with the company that *controls* their delivery platform?

Re:Tread lightly

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow - an unknown magazine, you happen to remember just happens to not appear because you like Android and needed to mark your nerd jizz on apple fanboys (did you touch them too? 'hey apple fanboy - suck my juicy cock!'). And I believe you unknown person with an unproven story because the internet never lies.

Fuck you slashdot - you're full of cunts.

Re:Tread lightly

[node 3]

Because News Corp and some podunk Android ezine are the same thing.

People always trot out this, "Apple is completely arbitrary! Be afraid, developers, BE AFRAID!" FUD line which has no basis in reality. Apple will never pull The Daily for something silly like an unfavorable article about Apple.

All of that plus

[Anonymous Coward]

... slashdotters giving away their real names, even if it's not immediately correlated to your /. nick. /. can't find out your name via your IP, but might make deals with FB in exchange for who-knows-what.
Tens of thousands of "likes" show lots of slashdotters otherwise nameless here. What they can't guess is that "oops, that referrer information just told FB who I am!"

Useful when uncle Sam comes a-knocking with a warrant regarding the next random Wikileaks / Anonymous protestor witchhunt.

Re:Walled Paradise.

[openfrog]

Sorry to reply to my own post, but I just noticed this and it is too good to miss. Listen to the voice of Big Brother at 00.12. After the welcoming of a new information age, he describes it emphatically as : "A garden of pure ideology".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OYecfV3ubP8

You cannot make this up.

new slogans

[blair1q]

"We've got a paranoid delusion for that."

"We decide. You download."

Re:new slogans

[Anonymous Coward]

Fair and balanced: is Obama intentionally screwing over the country, or is he simply being advised by incompetents? You decide.

Rupert Murdoch...

[telekon]

Rupert Murdoch said that The Daily offers 'unthinkable innovations' to the world of publishing.

Rupert Murdoch and News Corporation: always setting out to do the unthinkable.

Too Late To Change

[Anonymous Coward]

Steve Jobs is the new Gordon Brown: a greedy control freak abandoning his core base and kissing up to Murdoch. Apple is now just a company by the rich for the rich. Like Gordon Brown made David Cameron look good Steve Jobs is making Steve Ballmer look good. When all that iTunes revenue dries up Apple will be as fucked as Labour when the banking crisis hit.

Apple could avoid that by making their products more affordable, reverse the braindead decision to drop XServe, and sell a shrink wrapped OS X to the masses but they won't do it. As long as nobody in Apple has the balls to stand up to Steve Jobs and the revenue keeps rolling in they have no incentive to change. The problem is when they do it may be too late.

Re:What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[arth1]

Nope, no such luck - just another "It passed the spilling chucker, so we're good" story headline.

Incidentally, Rupert Murdoch is responsible for getting rid of copy editors and proof readers. Others have followed suit, because they can't afford to do otherwise and compete, and because the gen-X and later audiences are non-discriminating consumers who will happily consume feces, as long as it's plentiful and cheap.
The trickle-down effect is that Slashdot "editors" don't bother doing copy editing or proofreading either.

What's up with "apps"?

[Locke2005]

What exactly can you do with an app that you can't do in a web browser with Flash, AJAX, or HTML5?

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Nidi62]

What exactly can you do with an app that you can't do in a web browser with Flash, AJAX, or HTML5?

Sell it?

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Locke2005]

Let me rephrase that: what value does putting the content in an app instead of a web page provide to me, the consumer?

You can sell access to web pages too, you know.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Chapter80]

What exactly can you do with an app that you can't do in a web browser with Flash, AJAX, or HTML5?

I did this analysis last week, and summarized it for management in a nice pretty table that I can't easily reproduce here. But I'll do my best:

Regarding Standards: Web Apps will generally run on multiple platforms, but the technology is less mature. Smart Phone Apps need to be developed for each platform (iPhone vs Android, for example)

Regarding App Wake-up: Web app User must start the app by visiting the web page. but Smart Phone apps, Once installed, app can run in background and be awoken from server. Alerts work much better for Smart Phones than Web Apps. Notifications for Web apps must be performed "out of band" (i.e. emails for instance)

Regarding App Distribution: Web App is immediately accessible, no download required. vs Smart Phone App must be pre-installed once from the market / app store; Users are adapting to the market paradigm

Regarding App prominence on device: Web Apps require URLs or Shortcuts through bookmarks and hyperlinks. Smart Phone apps, Once installed, app can be prominent on the device "desktop" (web apps: Out of sight / Out of mind)

Regarding App Updates: Web apps have Central Control and immediate. Smart Phone apps have Easy updates, but user not required to update. Implications are Multiple versions of the smart phone app may be in the wild, and cause unnecessary support. Work-around might be to put in a self-destruct /auto-update feature (i.e. if this version is "too out of date", then nothing works until you update)

Regarding Swipe input: Web app- not available. On Smart Phone app: available - Allows for more robust application control

Regarding Voice Input: Web app not available. On Smart Phone apps, Available on Android. Google has voice integrated into many of their applications already, and has an API for developers

Regarding Location awareness: web apps: available in HTML5 - not on all Smart Phone Browsers yet. On Smart Phones: Available to apps through API. Implications: GPS coordinates can be read by compliant browsers. It will be cumbersome (i.e. user will get prompted, and may have already disabled the feature.) With Android, user is prompted as to whether they want to allow Location Awareness when the app is downloaded, and then never bothered again.

Regarding Camera: Web apps, it's not available unless you use Flash and prompt. Smart Phone apps: Available to apps through API. Implications: Uploading a photo to a server through a web application is cumbersome.

Regarding Orientation sensing (portrait or landscape): Web apps: not available to application, but browser may self-adjust. Smart Phone apps: Available to apps through API. Implications: Application can adjust its display, based on portrait vs. landscape

Regarding Accelerometer: web apps: not available. Smart Phone apps: Available to apps through API. Implications: Motion by the user can be sensed via the GPS. This is helpful in games - not sure of the business application implications yet.

Regarding Local Persistent Storage: Web apps: Cookies: very small local storage. Other storage can be done via prompting the user to save a file. Smart Phone apps: Massive storage is available (such as Touchdown email storage). A smart phone app can have a good sized data repository for reference material, with quick access. A web app can have a HUGE data repository, with slower access.

Regarding File Displaying (pdf, for example): Web apps: Browsers handle various file displays seamlessly . Smart Phone apps: Can be done by opening the browser. Probably not a huge difference between the two approaches.

Regarding Speed of app: Web app: Subject to data transfer rates. Smart Phone app: Once downloaded, no data transfer to run the app. Implications: Smart Phone apps will tend to be as fast or faster than web apps.

Regarding Animation: web apps: Don

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Chapter80]

I should clarify that my analysis is comparing web apps on mobile devices to smart phone apps.

So when I say that the technologies for web apps are less mature, for instance, I mean that there are certain things (like HTML 5 specifications for accessing Location, Camera, etc) that just aren't there yet. They are well specified in the APIs for Android apps and iOS apps, however.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Locke2005]

Quite comprehensive. I should have been more specific, what I meant was why are people using apps to deliver magazine type content. Some of these still apply:
1) I wasn't aware the animation was so limited for web apps.
2) Better gesture support was something I hadn't thought of.
3) Local apps can customize content based on GPS location; web apps tend to customize based only on IP address.
4) Web browsers should be able to cache web app pages so that they are available even when radio contact is lost.
I still think unless you're embedding game demos, a magazine doesn't need to be an app.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Anonymous Coward]

Self destruct/auto update is a bad idea, instead of "i.e. if this version is "too out of date", then nothing works until you update", try if it is too out of date, it won't be supported without an update. Allow your users to keep using old versions. Your nightmare support scenario seems quite a stretch. The rest seems a fairly good analysis of the state of the art. You might want to analyse security too though.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Chapter80]

I didn't mean to imply that animation is limited for web apps. Animation on a mobile web app is the same as animation on a web page. So you can do some flash stuff (if flash is supported on the smart phone), or you can do jQuery type of animation (collapsible menu items, highlight items, shake them, etc.) Probably the major difference (aside from the fact that you use different toolkits for your animation) is that the web app needs to download a lot of code to make the animation work, while the smart phone app downloads that code one time upon installation.

Regarding a news app, I think some of the issues that I mentioned still apply that you didn't include in your list.

- App Wake up: I think you might want to have breaking news alert you. Or anytime someone posts a story about the Pittsburgh Steelers or Egypt or your company name.

- Application Prominence and the "feel" of a native app. I think these two items are very critical. On my Smart Phone, I have a few icons on my main home screen that I use all the time. Slashdot's website isn't one of them. In order to get to slashdot, I need to start the browser, key in "sl", choose it from the list, and read the tiny slashdot website on my phone. If I had a mobile app installed, it would be on my desktop, one click and I would be reading articles and comments that are appropriate for my screen size. Reading Slashdot on a Droid X is a drag. (And Slashdot is essentially a news site, right?)

- Integrating with a camera: CNN just came out with an interactive app that allows you to snap a picture or a video, and immediately submit it to their site as "breaking news", along with a comment of what you are seeing. This was demo'd yesterday at Google's Honeycomb announcement. This would be pretty cumbersome to do using HTML5, flash, etc.

- Integration with other apps for a news site might be handy. Send this news story to a friend via MMS from my phone. Not sure how you'd do that with a web app.

- Something I left off of my analysis, above: Pay model is generally much better in the Mobile Apps. In-application purchases are a click away on the iPhone - it just shows up on your phone bill. And Honeycomb (Android 3.0) will have similar capability. How would you do in-app purchases on your Flash News app. Example - my local paper has a website (Gannett is the publisher), and users can purchase any high quality photos that are published on the site. You have to click through a complement payment process on their website - shopping cart, and all that. On a Smart Phone app, you could literally click-buy, click-confirm, and you own it.

My main conclusion with the exercise was to demonstrate that there's a place for mobile apps that web apps just won't fill. There are a group of people that will dig in their heels and say "Let's just stick with what we know (HTML, Flash, JavaScript) because there ARE certain advantages to that (support, using current knowledge, and application distribution being the main "pros"). But you'll end up getting blown away by a competitor that develops a mobile app.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Glock27]

Good analysis overall, but you missed one big point regarding "Speed of app". iOS apps, for instance, are fully compiled Obj-C programs, versus interpreted Javascript. JS has gotten a lot better, but it's not close to precompiled code efficiency. That's why any serious game developer releases a native app rather than a web app.

Flash games arrived because they were easy and Flash is pervasive, but they perform very poorly and are serious resource hogs for what they are.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Locke2005]

Yes, if you want to do anything with asynchronous notifications, you clearly need a native app.

Windows let's you create shortcuts to "favorite" URLs; iOS and Android should be able to do the same. The difference is these would need to fire up the browser and check that cached content hasn't been updated, so would be noticeably slower than a native app.

My Android browser supports pinch/spread gestures for resizing web pages quite well.

Flash supposedly supports access to local web cam and microphone, but in generally if you want to use any of the phone's hardware or messaging features, you're better off with a native app.

I'm not sure how an Amazon "1-click" purchase is that much worse than a native app purchase, but I don't have a lot of experience in this area.

Browser-based should let you deploy to multiple platforms more quickly, but my experience in getting controls written in JavaScript to work the same in IE and Netscape (many years ago) show that you still need to test extensively with each browser on each platform.

In summary, yes, there are a lot of reasons you might be better off with a native app, but it really depends on what your requirements are in the first place.

Re:What's up with "apps"?

[Chapter80]

Thanks for emphasizing the speed point.

Question: On Android, the apps are written in Java, and byte-compiled. This is certainly faster than JavaScript (which also has the penalty of download times as well as interpreted or compilation time when you run it). My question is, is Obj-C a byte compiled language like Java, or more like a fully compiled language like C?

I hate to show my ignorance publicly, but I've been under the impression that byte-compiled languages (like Java and Python) aren't "fully" compiled, as they still have certain "interpretive" capabilities (like garbage collection, heap management, and introspection in Python), whereas the traditional "compiled languages" would fully compile something into machine code with no interpreter involved, which is significantly faster than byte-compiled programs.

Is the performance of Obj-C more like Java, or more like a traditional compiled language (like C, or Cobol, Fortran, etc)? Scanning the Wikipedia page for Objective C, given that it has garbage collection, and some other run-time stuff included, I'm guessing that it performs similarly to Java.

I suspect it performs more like Java than compiled C, and I suspect that it's the object management (and maybe garbage collection or heap management) that is the bonus software that tends to slow it down.

Because evil begets evil?

[Shivetya]

Absurd word to describe the issue.

Here is a clue for the fanbois, Apple is out to make money, make lots of it, and they are doing very well at it. They are using News corp more so than News Corp is using them. See there is this little issue of Apple getting 30% of the take for doing nothing more than selling the platform to consumers. Its the best of both worlds for them.

Apple wants this publicized so OTHER companies join in so they can maintain their cash cow. The iPad and their new business model is meant to extract as much money as possible from end users. You are now just a bank account waiting to be drained. Not only do they get their 30% cut YOU willingly pay them for the device which enables them to do so.

From paying $299+ for a smart phone you in turn pay from $70 to $100+ to use to buying an iPad for $400+ that you again pay to access Apps they get a cut of.

Really, its beyond time to think that Apple is in our corner, we are just dollar signs to them and apparently far too many are way to willing to contribute.

Unthinkable?!?

[Locke2005]

You use that word a lot. I do not think it means what you think it means! Usually the word "unthinkable" is used in the context of the type of acts the typical slashdot reader would like to perform with Natalie Portman!

Re:Unthinkable?!?

[tehcyder]

You use that word a lot. I do not think it means what you think it means! Usually the word "unthinkable" is used in the context of the type of acts the typical slashdot reader would like to perform with Natalie Portman!

No, you're thinking of "unspeakable", as in "vile and depraved beyond the imagining of most normal human beings"..

Great.

[tboulay]

Awesome, so basically news corp. will be inventing news on a new platform now.

Worth a look

[QuincyDurant]

I saw an interesting feature story about presidential son Gamal Mubarak's flight to his $14.3 million townhouse in London. He and his trophy wife, 20 years his junior, left in a private jet with 100 suitcases. There was also a well-designed set of bullet points about why the uprising began. I couldn't find it again, but it said, for example, that the number of children under five suffering from malnutrition has grown by 300% in about five years. Not surprising in a place where the average worker makes three cents an hour for a 48-hour work week.

The lead story on Egypt has some spectacular photos of the uprising, but if there is a breaking news story to go with them, I couldn't find it.

The production values are really sensational. News Corp gave somebody a blank check to build it.

I detected no flavor of a Fox or Post slant. I saw a pop newspaper that is a bit of a cross between USA Today and People Magazine. The interface is not at all weblike, but it may be very popular with a mass audience. Since mass audiences are meat and drink to newspapers and magazines, The Daily may be a huge success. The only ad I noticed was one from Verizon.

I don't know if the costs of this enterprise can be recovered with "news stand" sales of ninety-nine cents a day or whatever they plan to charge. I'll certainly have to see a lot more hard news before I sign up for the paid version.

While I have no desire to line Murdoch's pockets, I very much hope The Daily will be sufficiently profitable to spawn imitators. Many much more reputable publishers than he are on the ropes, and if he points the way to their survival, so much the better for readers and the body politic.

Why Not Just...

[Grizzley9]

Read the website? Or a multitude of different news websites. How is this even remotely worth a buck a week when everything else is free?

boo apple

[Anonymous Coward]

I was under the imrpession apple was improving by increasing security by replacing their infineon chip while also adding wireless payment, but this news corp stuff is over the top into retardo land.

Garden of Perfect Ideology

[lennier]

1984 indeed. iTelescreen.

1) Total BS, you can choose not to buy the iPad

Yes. Yes, that's exactly how we can stop 2014 being like '1984'.

"Editor-in-Chief Jesse Angelo"

[walter_f]

Don Corleone (Marlon Brando) said:
"And, Angelo, make sure it's an offer they can't refuse."

Facebook, Gravatar, Disqus, PayPal, etc.

[Anonymous Coward]

what.. have you not noticed the trend lately on a large number of sites is to not actually offer any functionality themselves, instead outsourcing that to other 'free' websites (free as in they'll harvest every piece of information about you and correlate their collective databases) by embedding their handlers?

Log in with Facebook, comment on articles using Disqus, and have Gravatar add the avatar associated with your e-mail address to the discussions.

I'm pretty sure I'm still missing a few, but those three are definitely finding themselves onto more and more sites with many site owners shrugging their shoulders at any privacy concerns - ditching their existing systems in favor of these handlers, migrating databases where possible (for convenience, you see), and not bothering to make it opt-in.

unthinkable innovations

[internettoughguy]

The Daily offers 'unthinkable innovations' to the world of publishing."

Well said Emperor Palpatine.

Re:What's this "New Corp"? Murdoch sold News Corp?

[grcumb]

How about a real innovation for Murdoch papers - like reporting the news with a bit less bias?

No, for Murdoch, that would be literally unthinkable... :)

Nono, he meant to thay unthinkable, jutht like the Titanic.

buzzwords fueled by ignorance and blind-politics

[Anonymous Coward]

I've read dozens and dozens of posts here from apparent ideologues who astonishingly have no clue that 3rd-grade ad-hominem attacks, name-calling, and accusations for which they provide zero evidence (or even a single example) are not rational positions, but are in-fact deflections by means of transparent fallacy. This one, however, I found to be beyond the pale. Watch this, I'm not going to call anyone names. As crazy as it sounds, I'm going to address the argument itself, without attacking the person that made it. What's more, I'll use actual facts to support my conclusion.

Really? I want to make sure I understand the question. What can you do with an app that you can't do with a browser, Flash, AJAX, or HTML5. I submit that a "web browser" IS an app. I submit that "Flash.app" is also an app. Since the J in AJAX is Javascript, I submit that the "interpreter" that "interprets and executes" the a .js file IS an app. HTML5 is likewise rendered by Safari.app or Firefox.app.

So, based upon the above premises, I submit that the question should actually read: "What exactly can you do (with a compiled, stand-alone) app (that can use any conceivable computing technology, any conceivable inter-networked protocol supported by the platform) that you can't do with (a bunch of other "apps" that ARE constrained by web or web 2.0 technologies, are wholly dependent on compatibility with not one web browser, but ALL web browsers supported by the platform, at the mercy of browser add-ons and plug-ins, blah blah blah)? Another read of the question could reasonably be summarized as: "What could possibly be more secure than a web browser?"

I think the math pretty well does itself here.

Politics aside: I'm stealing some design ideas

[Invisible Now]

I like tablets. I own an iPad and develop for it.

So, many think Murdoch is the Devil. Clearly he can pay some talented developers and designers. (Journalists, too, but I want avoid politics for this post.)

I downloaded the app and liked some features:

It's pretty and doesn't look like a website, or the NYTimes black and white no pictures (mostly) app.

It's effortless to skim through. Just flick your thumb on the screen. Like you thumb through a magazine in your dentist's waiting room.

Ads are easy to skip, (full pages) just flick past them, and content pages don't look like patchwork quilts of doubleclick drop ins.

Easy to trigger streaming video ads, like the full page (HD-ish) trailer for "Rio" are more than print will ever deliver, and since you opt-in by hitting play if you are interested, they are big plus.

I'm incorporating Daily's new full page, no menu bars, etc, zeitgeist, into a conventional site I'm working on today. The design approaches being a new paradigm for web design so I'm trying to learn and copy as much as I can.

I think Daily's weakest at knowing where you are and returning there, though the progress bar - a surrogate for the thickness of real pages helps. And searching. Maybe I just haven't seen it. The slide spinner is so-so for this...

Finally: 99 cents a week (or whatever, as a recurring micropayment subscription) is something I might want to see some worthy but struggling clients try...

Re:Politics aside: I'm stealing some design ideas

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. I don't want to pay Newscorp any money at all and I don't want to buy an Ipad, but I'd like to have a newspaper service like this on my Droid tablet.

Re:Politics aside: I'm stealing some design ideas

[tehcyder]

'm incorporating Daily's new full page, no menu bars, etc, zeitgeist, into a conventional site I'm working on today. The design approaches being a new paradigm for web design so I'm trying to learn and copy as much as I can.

Advertising/PR shills always give themselves away by their language. Must try harder, Rupert.

Will Pay when Economist App is released

[addikt10]

When (and if) the Economist releases an iPad app, I will pay for news.
I will not, under any circumstances, elect to give money to Murdoch or anything in his empire.
If the Economist doesn't release an iPad app, then I don't foresee paying for electronically distributed news, iPad app or not.

It's already out...

[Invisible Now]

Go to the app store...

Is this considered clever?

[Anonymous Coward]

"FUD much?"

I find a lot of under 25's saying :
      much?

As if this is clever or something. I find it the 2011 equivalent of saying "You're seeeew immmatuuuuuure"

I can't believe an adult would use a phrase like that. Its sounds stupid in addition to being lazy grammatically.

Re:Is this considered clever?

[H0p313ss]

"FUD much?"

I find a lot of under 25's saying :

      much?

I'm 42, so you can bite my shiny metal ass.

Ironic

[Anonymous Coward]

Ironically, the launch was held in a museum. They could just skip distribution and place it there as an exhibit, along with last century's revenue models for newspapers.

Just as I expected

[reboot246]

Nothing but a lot of Fox News bashing by a very left-leaning slashdot crowd.

I don't know why the hell I come here.

Re:Just as I expected

[Anonymous Coward]

Because you're stupid?

Re:Just as I expected

[Eglembor]

God told you to? its part of his intelligent design.

Re:Just as I expected

[tehcyder]

Nothing but a lot of Fox News bashing by a very left-leaning slashdot crowd. I don't know why the hell I come here.

You don't have to be left wing to bash Fox News, having a brain is sufficient.

Still, how long will the fad last?

[gwolf]

I agree, traditional newspapers have now choose between offering their contents on Internet for free or being relegated as an old-style, non-accessible newspaper. And the "apps" market is kewl. And people buy apps, because it just makes sense, and they already have the AppleWare.

Still, if the information is the same I can get at any traditional newspaper's website, why should I care to have an app for it? Just because it flips through pages instead of hopping through links? And that is an advantae, why?

If they come up with good, original content, great. They would survive anyway being an old-fashioned media. If they just keep pushing an app for browsing the paper... Meh, they will fall into the huge oblivion of worthless tech.

Perfect Story for Analysis of Negative /. Mod bias

[WarmNoodles]

Perfect Story for an Analysis of /. Moderator Bias

snapshot taken when Comment count was at: 179
3 Comments Total Modded down: 1 comment that was Sarcastic Fox & Pro Apple, 2 Comments that were Anti Apple & Anti Fox
3 Comments Total Modded up: 1 comment that was Pro Apple Pro Fox, 2 comments Pro Apple Anti Fox.

2 hours and 4 comments later (@ 184 comments 12:30 EST), Moderators had worked a little more bias in.

Modded down to zero for
Calling both Apple and Fox Evil http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35086178
Modded up to 5 for Calling both Apple and Fox Evil http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35083156

Criteria:
Score: 0, -1 logged in
Score: -1 Anonymous
Count of 5 with Score: 5
Any Score flamebait

Out of scope
Score 1 - 4 Logged in
Score 0 – 4 Anonymous

Measurement:

Pro Apple and Pro Fox
0 comments with - Score: 0, -1 logged in
0 comments with - Score: -1 Anonymous
1 comment with - Score: 5
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35083372

Pro Apple and against Fox
0 comments with - Score: 0, -1 logged in
0 comments with - Score: -1 Anonymous
2 comments with - Score: 5
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35083680
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35083112

Flamebait - Pro Apple and Sarcastic ambiguous towards Fox
1 comment with - Score: 0, -1 logged in
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35083468

Against Apple and Pro Fox
0 comments with - Score: 0, -1 logged in
0 comments with - Score: -1 Anonymous
0 comments with - Score: 5

Against Apple and against Fox
2 comments with - Score: 0, -1 logged in
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35084546
http://apple.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1977656&cid=35084990

The facts speak for themselves and are interesting. It seems, calling anyone evil is a no no unless you call out Apple in a positive light and calling any one evil or stupid is a no no unless you call out Fox in a negative light.

The Daily is available only in the US App Store

[DavidL]

Here is another reason why we shouldn't use the App Store to get news. The Daily is currently available only in the US App Store, limiting access to its information not just to one platform, but also to just one country. Its almost unheard of for a newspaper to limit its web distribution to just one country (even though its technically feasible with some effort). This shows the App Store will work to fragment the world by providing information tailored to individual countries, as the ability to publish by country is a standard feature built right into iTunes distribution, originally for the sake of the music industry. In the case of news, this is a terrible outcome for the planet, and Apple should be ashamed.

"The Daily"

[Anonymous Coward]

Whatever happened to 24/7? The name is an anachronism in itself, with most news operations now operating continuously. The smart name would have been something like "Now". It represents, to me, Murdochs mindset. He's an ink man, through and through. It's almost a rewind to the 50s.

It's official

[tehcyder]

Apple are now evil.

Choice

[Eglembor]

I don't harvest any love for Murdoch and disagree with some of Apple's tactics you still have the choice to not buy the app, and not buy an iPad. The app doesn't come installed by default you actually have to go to the App Store and get it/buy it.

"Unthinkable Innovations" ?

[OwMyBrain]

INCONCEIVABLE!

Jobs & Murdoch, a match of Orwellian proportio

[lpq]

It makes sense....apple's Job's reminds me of an arch-villain in his turtle-neck costume and the apple corporation is strongly aligned with the ways and means of News Corp. The business models of each are strongly echoed in the other's. Both have had strong "come from behind" backgrounds, both want to conquer the world (in their own business areas), both have no qualms about doing whatever it takes to reach their goal.

Apple's stance in the computer world (post-Woz) has been about locking down the user and turning them into passive consumers & eliminating freedoms. In the publishing world Murdoch has led the herd to try to force pay-wall (pay-to-read) systems on the consumer and restricting dissemination and even indexing of his material in order to turn internet denizens into *paying* consumers. Murdoch's political support has been behind candidates willing to put business interests first, before the people and has generally supported the more conservative candidates for office.

Apple's stance in controlling the iphone and the app-store show them very willing to boldly eliminate potential competition as well as cater to morality police, showing they can be a new arm for government censorship (just as consortiums and companies in the past have been given monopoly status in return for doing things for the government that it couldn't do itself due to constitutional constraints).

In all, it would seem that Jobs and Murdoch share a great deal of views and tactics in dealing with 'consumers' and other companies. Their success would be bad for the american consumer's freedom. Their joint venture, hopefully, will fail.

The one point that gives hope for failure: despite Jobs success with consumer electronics products, Murdoch has had a history of failures at attempting to erect paywalls around his content. It will be interesting to see how this plays out...

Re:Perfect Story for Analysis of Negative /. Mod b

[WarmNoodles]

Now that's irony. ROFL. Thanks I needed a laugh