What is Digg?Sponsored by Best Buy
Best Buy(R) Gift Advice view!
bestbuygiftadvice.com - Twelpforce(TM) Carolers explain the benefits of shopping at Best Buy in this new holiday classic.
94 Comments
- neoform, on 10/11/2007, -24/+84Bah, they wanted to be the first to break the story, so they didn't bother checking the sources by picking up the phone and getting a comment (yes they claim to have tried calling, but they shouldn't have posted it without first confirming it with at least one other source).
Bad journalism. - Alex76, on 10/11/2007, -16/+60Yes we know they acted in good faith, but I seriously doubt that they were the SOLE reason Apple lost all that market cap...
- robbh66, on 10/11/2007, -6/+31FTA: "Given the nature of that news, we felt we had an obligation to inform people that Apple had sent out an internal memo in preparation of a delay in the iPhone and Leopard. And so I ran the story; I believe most people in my place would have done the same."
No. You ran with the story because you thought you'd make some cash being the first to run with it. Engadget is *not* a normal news site that survives off it's journalism and trying to confirm with your sources and leaving a message are *not* the same thing. They have almost zero original content and use other people's journalism to survive. They find what other people have posted, summarize it, and make it a story. I highly doubt they *ever* check their sources before posting anything. - aristotle0dude, on 10/11/2007, -1/+23Bloggers are not journalists. They have little or no training and no code of ethics or peer review. They should not be relied upon.
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -7/+27No, Engadget didn't cause financial harm to anybody. Investors had the same opportunity as Engadget to wait for additional verification. They gambled that what little information they had was correct and sold their stock in an attempt to cut their losses. If the information had turned out to be correct those same investors would have been kissing Engadget's ass for breaking the story early.
- TheRealToma, on 10/11/2007, -6/+22Maybe it just proves that Apple investors take blog sites a little too seriously?
When can i file a bug against Web 2.0? - monkeyangst, on 10/11/2007, -0/+13There is one simple thing Engadget could have done to prevent all this -- they could have READ the fake memo.
You see, the memo began: "Apple issued a press release today..." so, then, the way to determine if the memo is fake would be to find out if there was such a press release. You would think this would be easy to do. I believe Apple archives all their press releases on their site. If there is no such release, it means one of two things: A) the memo is fake, or B) Apple has given their employees a heads-up that they're doing something before they do it. No one familiar in the least with Apple corporate culture would believe option B.
This blog seems to be having fun playing journalist, what with getting "scoops" and issuing retractions, without the legwork in between. - soul12, on 10/11/2007, -2/+15you're
you're
it's - Quix, on 10/11/2007, -9/+20First off, did flag564 just make a somewhat favorable (even if indirectly so) comment in Apple's favor??? *head explodes*
Secondly, xTRUMANx, how exactly do you differentiate between the New York Times and Engadget? Engadget isn't exactly the daily personal musings of some random guy - it's a "news" outlet with a paid staff supported by advertisers. Whoa, just like the New York Times!!! The "we can't be held responsible - we're just a blog" line of defense just isn't going to hold up in situations like these (yes, I'm sure there will be many more). Where is the line between "blog" and "accountable news organization," and who defines it?
If you're running a professional, for-profit business (like Engadget), you'd better do a little fact-checking before posting whatever hits your email inbox. A quick phone call to Apple PR would have avoided this fiasco. - noahhoward, on 10/11/2007, -4/+15This is a big problem with all media today. It isn't about news, it is about being the first one with a juicy headline. This is just horrible journalism. If you can't confirm it you have no reason to run it.
- gharding, on 10/11/2007, -6/+16Didn't lose any credibility with me. It's a blog on the internet.. it automatically comes with a grain of salt. And for the people saying "confirm your sources".. HOW ON EARTH do you confirm the source of a leaked Apple memo? Apple's PR team phone system is better replaced with a voicemail line that says "No comment" then hangs up on you.
- Sandkat, on 10/11/2007, -1/+11Engadget needs to find more intelligent sources. The original memo sent out was formatted in the OLD Bullet News format that hasn't been used for a while now. Any regular reader of the Bullet News emails should have been able to tell that something wasn't right with that memo.
- Badtastic, on 10/11/2007, -1/+10Yeah, its funny how bloggers demand the same respect and rights as professional journalists but when they screw up, they sniff "Oh but we're just a blog"
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -7/+16@Alex76, coming less than a week after the shareholders' meeting, in which a June delivery for the iPhone was assured to everyone, yesterday's posting was a HUGE story. How else would you explain a 4% plunge in the share price (~107.5 > ~103.5) with millions of shares traded in just a few minutes? Get real. Anybody with sense would have thought the e-mail alone was insufficient evidence and the story too volatile to post without independent confirmation. (Multiple people receiving the same e-mail is not independent confirmation). Certainly not "absolutely authoritative" or whatever b.s. words Engadget used to describe the reliability of their sources. Grow up, kids, and realize you are just as responsible for the world you live in. Hopefully you actually have a stronger aversion to dung than many have demonstrated so far.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -13/+22"Could things have be done differently? Definitely. We might have waited until the press release the memo mentioned hit the wires. That could have been any time, though, an hour, three hours; we were obviously sitting on a pretty major story, and we believed that would have been a disservice to our readers."
Instead the lure of all that ad revenue from Digg readers and word of mouth got the better of them and they've lost even more credibility.
Grovelling will get him absolutely nowhere - he made a really amateur mistake and needs to learn to live with it. - gamerscalling, on 10/11/2007, -2/+10The comments say it too, they should have had an apology in there somewhere. Not just a posting of how they were tricked, trying to make us blame them less.
- Dolomite, on 10/11/2007, -1/+8Just another example of bloggers (who always cry they want to be treated like real journalists), failing to act like real journalists.
- ekleinunt, on 10/11/2007, -2/+9Yes you can. Its called the fashion industry. Or the entertainment industry. Or the pharmaceutical industry. etc. etc. etc.
- dkla, on 10/11/2007, -0/+6Did you notice that the words "apologize" or "sorry" weren't anywhere in their post?
- EtherGnat, on 10/11/2007, -3/+9And Apple had been assuring everybody that Leopard wasn't delayed--right up until they announced the original delay. It happens--hell, even the Apple employees were fooled, so it couldn't have been that ridiculous.
- pr0gr4m, on 10/11/2007, -1/+7"we felt we had an obligation to inform people that Apple had sent out an internal memo in preparation of a delay in the iPhone and Leopard."
Exactly what obligation is that? They new that this was NOT a public memo. It was a private one leaked out to them. They are posting private corporate information to the public and now they want to apologize for giving out wrong information? The problem is NOT that they posted incorrect information...it's that they posted information that was not intended for public viewing...
And what about the initial email? An email sent to several Apple employees seemingly coming from Apple without an explanation as to why or where it really came from? What if it was a security check..Apple releasing false information to a select few employees it suspects are leaking private data to try and flush them out. Well I hope they got their man. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -11/+16Engadget is run by *****.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -4/+9Exactly. You read a blog like Engadget, and you take it as ... "This is probably true, but I'll wait til a mainstream media source reports on it, before I consider it as fact.".
Especially if you're making stock buying / selling decisions...Geez. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -9/+13I'm floored they posted that unprofessional and lame explanation.
It just reaffirms to me how lacking Engadget is in the journalistic integrity area.
Everyone knows their motivation. They thought they had a big scoop on AAPL. Like fools they took the bait and posted without taking the time or expending effort to confirm the original claim. AAPL tanked and lots of investors paid a price. Luckily it bounced back, but it very well may not have.
Pick a side, Engadget. Either have journalistic integrity or dont. Conveniently walking the fine line between press and blogging is cop out. - Evoguy, on 10/11/2007, -6/+9Anyone who makes investing decisions based on a blog is a moron. I say Engadget has no blame on this.. the blame lies with idiots who panic sold based on some random rumor.
- auricomnet, on 10/11/2007, -1/+4I just emailed the violations email at the sec.gov website I hope you all do the same.
- TheMongo, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Yeah, it probably should have been posted as a "highly likely' rumor, since it *wasn't* official by any definition. Kudos to Engadget for at least owning up to it though.
- kenvsryu, on 10/11/2007, -4/+7Hmm looks like Engadget found it's own hd-dvd key, but they might have to go against the SEC. Uhoh.
- wangarific, on 10/11/2007, -2/+5Has anyone entertained the idea that Apple was using it as a way to sniff out an informant?
- DrDabbles, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Well, this kid on thing happens to real news agencies all the time which, in a way, actually legitimizes Engadget as a source of news. All the major news providers, hell, even the AP, have had to retract incorrect stories where a source has given them information that was later found to be completely false or only partially true. That's the risk you take with inside sources.
On the other hand, does anybody think maybe this could be an apple fishing expedition? Trying to root out whoever within Apple is leaking details to the media? Seems like a story that they KNOW would get major rotation, and it's easy enough to make it look like you sent an email to a larger group than you really did. Just kinda curious is all. Why would a real Apple employee actually write a damaging Apple memo and then distribute it within the company? Seems more like suicide than a prank. - unusualbob, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3RTFA They just contacted multiple apple employees to find that they had all recieved this 'memo', everyone they talked to seemed to think it was original. Oh, and btw if you think that a ceo won't lie about production schedule to keep his stock price up you need to learn a thing or two about business.
- airship, on 10/11/2007, -6/+8So, all of you who are or have been actual journalists, raise your hands....
Just as I thought : NOBODY.
Since I'm the former editor of a computer magazine, I can tell you how it works in the real world:
(1) You get information from one source.
(2) You confirm it with a second source.
(3) You print it.
It is extremely unprofessional to skip step #2. In fact, in most news organizations you'll get fired for it. But Engadget DID do step #2. It just turns out that both of their sources had bad information.
If a story you print is false, you print a retraction. Engadget did. Quickly. And they apologized. As a former tech journalist myself, I can say I've got a lot of respect for how they handled this story.
The main problem is that electronic news is so much faster than print news. In the 'good old days', Lois Lane would have had 24 hours to find out if a source was accurate. Today, if you don' t publish what you know immediately, you'll be behind your competitors. And in the news business, that means you'll be dead. - jazzyinco, on 10/11/2007, -1/+3Has anyone entertained the idea that Ryan just made all that latest stuff up to CYA?
See eWeek on "Apple Denies Internal Source for Fake iPhone Memo" - asjk, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4The point is this hurt web-based news sites in general. Bloggers et al. have been straining for credibility with the old media and the public and this event was a black eye.
I am reminded of the reports of minorities and women when they started in the workplace. Their belief was that they had to work HARDER then everyone else to combat the perception that they were inferior. I've heard far too much from apologists for bloggers saying, "well, the established media gets fooled sometime too." For the newcomer in any business being just-as-bad is insufficient. Unfair but true. - totorototoro, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2neiltc13,
the whole "disservice to our readers" thing is the only part that bugs me. You know, sites like ThinkSecret and AppleInsider make their living off of rumors, and being first is more important than being right. Engadget to me has always been about doing the best reporting on actual products and news, and delaying reporting this for 3 hours to get confirmation isn't a disservice, its an important responsibility that would have set Engadget above the blogger fray, and ranked them up with more responsibile journalism.
This isn't really about stocks or Apple in the long run; its about the unfortunate perception of Blogs ever serving as anything other than less than legitimate and reliable news sources. This incident does nothing to change that perception. - Tigrou, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2This is a new record.
Dell, Sony, Verizon and Kryptonite Locks all lost millions in market cap from ONE BLOG POSTING. Around $10 Million each. This is almost a thousand times. Wow.
Any more suggestions for this hall of fame? - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -0/+2You would think that tech journalists would be weary of this kind of email. With all the attention put on email scams I find it silly that engadget would fall for this. Anyway, I guess being able to break news first is more important than getting the story right.
- GotMex, on 10/11/2007, -4/+6I think all the people that sold their Apple stock based off one post on Engadget are at fault.
- inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+4Serves Engadget right....
Takes a ***** up this big to realize how bad they actually are.
They just steal other peoples research and repost it.
I hope this is the death of this sorry as website. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -2/+3Perhaps the most accurate post in this entire thread.
They were ***** in their decision to post the story in the first place, and they were ***** in their "excuse" as to why they did it. - inactive, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2"we were obviously sitting on a pretty major story"
well, obviously they weren't. waiting an hour or two would have made that clear. - haqattaq, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Get in the mind of a short term stock trader,,then you'll understand. Any whiff of news in a major company is an *opportunity* to make money.
Buy the rumor, Sell the news. - The_Dude, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You're taking a risk as soon as you buy ANY shares anytime.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1The situation was beyond their ability to handle properly, so it couldn't be their fault for taking it on.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1No, the people who sold are the ones who got hurt, just as rape victims don't ask for it.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -1/+2Tech journalists would also be wary of such email.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1You completely missed the major problem area, which involves the iPhone. The false rumor involved not just Leopard, but a second delay of Leopard within one month or so, AND an iPhone delay. Leopard has not been seen so far as injecting much revenue into Apple. Another delay of Leopard would be important, and it would indicate Apple isn't managing things well, but it would not be a HUGE story. In contrast, the iPhone represents a major new market segment for Apple, where Apple has already expended much of its resources that supposedly already caused one delay of Leopard. Much of Apple's present stock valuation is dependent on iPhone prospects.
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1@EtherGnat, it couldn't have been that ridiculous? We're talking an order of magnitude difference in importance. And from Engadget's report, you'd think John Tenet told them it was a "slam dunk".
- streak, on 10/11/2007, -0/+1Multiple employees receiving the same (fake) memo does not constitute multiple sources. You and I receive the same spam promoting a penny stock. Does that mean the stock is worth telling our grandmas to buy?
-
Show 51 - 95 of 95 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is