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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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]

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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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

[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.

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.

[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.

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!'

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.

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!"

Re:"unthinkable innovations?"

[_Sprocket_]

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

Re:New Corp?

[robot256]

I think I like "New$ Corp" better.

'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'

[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: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... :)

I for one...

[Baseclass]

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

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 :-)

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: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.

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: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

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...

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.