Strangely germane to the fascinating debate between Kos, Atrios, and Senator Feingold, is this new Macworld policy of describing the background of reviewers. If this was a standard practice everywhere in the media world, one would be more likely to dismiss certain opinions as 'being bought', especially in the political realm.
Macworld: Editors' Notes: Honesty Is the Best Policy
Last week the Wall Street Journal ran a story about James Oppenheim, technology editor for Child Magazine. Mr. Oppenheim was recently invited to a Texas TV show to talk about the latest tech toys for kids. One of the gadgets he touted on the air was Kodak’s “My ABC’s Picture Book.” He also recommended gizmos from Atari, Leapfrog, Mattel, Microsoft, and RadioShack.
According to the Journal, Mr. Oppenheim and his TV hosts neglected to mention one thing: Those companies had all paid him to mention their products on the air. Mr. Oppenheim later went on NBC’s Today show and touted the same Kodak product (though the company did not specifically pay him for that mention.)
I’m sure plenty of you hear a story like that and say, “Well, duh.”
It’s a sad fact of writing about technology that some of our readers think we’re on the take. Or, to put it less bluntly, many of our more cynical readers think our business interests are too closely entwined with those of the companies we cover for us to be completely trustworthy.
As Atrios says:
To put it another way, let's say I turn my blog over to Joe Trippi for a few weeks. Would he have to post up his full client list on the blog? Doesn't sound unreasonable, except for the fact that he never had to do so when appearing on MSNBC or any other outlet. Not picking on Trippi, just making the point that these kinds of disclosure requirements would be, contrary to what seems to be conventional wisdom, unique to the internet.
{Current Affairs, Macintosh, Techno-babble}
Technorati Tags: Current Affairs
