Assessing Media Bias: Microsoft Vs. Everyone Else
snydeq writes "J. Peter Bruzzese questions whether Microsoft receives unfair criticism in the media, while Apple, Facebook, and Google seem to get away from missteps unscathed. 'I've noticed an unfair, ongoing trend: If Microsoft does something a little off, it gets bashed into the ground for it. But if Google, Facebook, or Apple (all three of which can be categorized, like Microsoft, as The Man in their own rights) missteps, it generally gets mild reprimands and even support from the media and those drinking the Kool-Aid.' Do you feel any inherent media bias in its coverage of the tech industry?"
towards Apple.
If Microsoft hadn't already alienated the world by trying to bully them, then I might care.
What you're describing is the difference between a giant, scary company with a good PR department, and one that has no idea how to sell their brand. I think it's that simple.
Are we really entertaining the topic of Facebook getting a free pass on PR? They get slammed every time a privacy issue comes up;
Likewise Apple gets hammered every time there's an iphone glitch or IOS issue effecting battery life.
Google? You mean the near universal punching bag for reasons why "do no evil" cannot be their motto?
Microsoft has been left relatively alone while Google and Facebook and Apple have faced the most severe scrutiny of late. Also the fact that conversation about the patent wars is dominated by Florian Mueller and people quoting Florian Mueller has meant Microsoft has got off very lightly, even in its extremely dubious attempts to collect royalty for Android based on software patents, and attemps at bullying smaller companies like BArnes and Noble: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=2011111122291296
Or the fact that despite anti trust rulings, we still get Windows bundled with all non Apple laptops with no option to avoid paying for it, and IE is still bundled?
No, they still get off too lightly.
This reads just like one of their whiny op-eds about the liberal media only focusing on republicans (and of course they're all lies or exaggerations).
It is the circle of life.
Once upon a time, it was IBM who had every misstep reported as evil and Microsoft was the could-do-no-wrong company,.
Twenty years from now, No one will talk about Microsoft at all, though they will still be in business. Everyone will jump on the evil that Google does, and no matter what they do, OCP (or the current new kid on the block) will do no wrong.
vi +
I have my issues with Microsoft, and enough of them to preclude any possibility of me ever becoming a fanboy no matter how much I may like a certain number of their products, but I agree with the assessment in this article.
Apple gets a pass because they have better marketing than God, and, as a result, a more loyal religion. Facebook gets a pass because they are everybody's favorite virtual hangout spot. Google gets a pass because they've long been thought of as almost an interchangeable term with "the internet" and they're constant, but undeserved, refrain of "don't be evil". But Microsoft? They're like the tech world's Yankees. They've dominated for so long, and in many ways so unfairly (at least in the past), that it doesn't matter how good of a show they put on because everybody is just showing up to boo them.
I suppose every story needs a villain, though. IBM is too far removed from consumers' minds to fill that role, anymore. Perhaps it is the inevitable karma of their past monopolist actions catching up to them, but it certainly seems as though Microsoft have become the pariah at the party these days.
Exactly how far back does your memory go? For decades while Microsoft held power over all computers that mattered the press was overwhelming pro-M$. A big part of that was of course because they poured an enormous amount of money into the publishers' coffers. Even whole publishers owed their existence to M$ and never would be heard a discouraging word (ever heard of Ziff-Davis?). Then there was this little thing of being convicted of illegal antitrust market manipulation and a few folks woke up to the idea that it is possible that not everything M$ puts out smells all that sweet.
Slashdot finally got rid of the Borg Gates image after all and people who still type M$ are openly mocked.
And they haven't really done anything that dispells that reputation. Their recent attempt at bullying with patents is a case in point.
But I still agree with the article. But that's because I don't think Apple or Google are appropriately taken to task for some things they do that are wrong. Particularly Apple.
Need a Python, C++, Unix, Linux develop
It all depends on who you listen to and which negative coverage you 'notice'. Microsoft gets tons of praise and has an army of fanboys, just like Apple and Google and Facebook, each of which seems to feel that their brand is under constant attack while the 'others' get off easy.
I don't know if the media is biased against MS or not . I know I am.
sigo ergo sum
I think this article is itself media bias. Apparently the author forgot about the epic lawsuits and class actions both google and apple faced for their handling of wifi logging for location services, google's street view wrist-slaps, and the very recent '4G in Australia' issue apple is currently being litigated for.
People don't 'bash microsoft into the ground' and more than they do the other 'The Man's. And to claim they do is itself dishonest, pro-microsoft bias.
Gartner couldn't be any more insanely pro MS if they were branded a subsidiary of MS.
In the media, sure. Apple is always launching new gizmos and the media eats it up like a child on Christmas morning. They can't help it if it's a slow news day.
But do tech publications have the same bias? Seems unlikely to me; there's always stories on Slashdot criticising Apple (and Google, and Microsoft.) Same goes for any other tech news site I've seen, baring 9to5mac and such.
There's no -1 for "I don't get it."
They are no longer seen as tech leaders but as a company that forces you buy from them.
While they get lucky with a few products their innovation generally appears as incompetent and poorly implemented (such as Win 8).
Most people don't like having to buy an updated version of windows and office every few years and start to think another company might be able do a better job.
Heinlein summed it up best: "Everybody hates the fat kid." Microsoft was a media darling in the early '90s when it was a growth company; the little scrappy newcomer fighting against big bad IBM and their bloated, overpriced systems. Once they were #1, press coverage gradually turned against them and they became the new IBM: big, bad M$ and their bloated, overpriced software.
Some of you may have noticed the same thing happening to Google over the past few years. I see more and more negative news stories on them every year. Soon, they'll be hated too.
Bullies have to work extremely hard to loose their reputation as a bully. Non-bullies who mess up are worthy of more lee-way.
...someone who expects 'the media' to be 'unbiased'. Here's a clue for you: there is no such thing as an unbiased news report.
7. Monster Cables
I was with you up to "monster cables". Now, that's utterly BS: how can one hate monster cables? (I gotta love them, e.g. no geek would be able to blame superluminal neutrinos on Tuscan milk).
Questions raise, answers kill. Raise questions to stay alive.
With google, YOU are the product.
(Assuming you meant products, instead of productions.)
The real Sig captains the Northwestern. This one captains
If anyone thinks Microsoft is being criticized unfairly, the cure is easy. Just head over to Rob Enderle's website: www.enderlegroup.com. Here are some recent articles:
"Is Google Facing the Beginning of the End?"
"The New iPad: Apple lowers the bar"
"Windows 8 vs. OS X Mountain Lion -- why Apple Suddenly Sucks"
Your esteem for Microsoft will return to an all-time high.
Which of the following four companies is a convicted monopolist?
a) Microsoft
b) Apple
c) Facebook
d) Google
The correct answer is "a" (Microsoft). The leadership that festered that predatory behavior is still at Microsoft. Bill Gates is Chairman, Steve Ballmer is CEO. That's why Microsoft's actions warrant careful scrutiny.
It's unfortunate that the "editors" allowed themselves to be trolled this way.
Microsoft: You had to marry me, your parents gave you no other choice. Well, I cheated on you. Many times. And you can't do anything about it.
Apple: If you wanna marry me, it's gonna cost you a huge dowry. It's your choice, but once you're in you have to do everything my way. I wear the pants here.
Google: You can marry me if you want or not. It'll be an open relationship, we'll try lots of new things. You might not like some of the things I do, but you can leave any time.
Is it any wonder that the Microsoft way breeds the most resentment?