大象传媒

I think the price cut indicates that they've reached all the mac addict early adopters, now they want to reach beyond that market in much the same way the ipod has.

I think your coverage has been restrained, thoughtful and measured. I have no issues with the manner in which you reported nor the volume of coverage. What makes me worry is the extreme polarisation of opinion shown up in the comments sections blogs like this one and the lack of critical thinking of those making them.

iPhone is a great piece of design, incorporating technology, some of which is excellent, some of which is not. Does that make it the best thing since sliced bread? No. Does it make it a massive disappointment? No. If you like Apple - and I do - it's exciting to see what new systems / products they are developing. Like it or not, they are bringing fresh ideas to the market place.

I hope that you will continue to cover this in the same way that you will cover Nokia's latest offering or Microsoft's - that is with a critical eye and an objective point of view. That's all I expect from the 大象传媒.

Interesting attitude the 大象传媒 has ... witness Rory's comment that "this was just an incremental change rather than the ground-breaking event that the original iPhone announcement had been last year".

The only ground-breaking thing about the iPhone was the operation of its touchscreen interface, and even that was only a logical evolution from what other companies had pioneered earlier.

In terms of hardware and software features, the original iPhone was poor in comparison to other devices ... even my several year old Palm PDA could connect to, and synchronise with, my home wireless network - the latter of which it appears even the iPhone 2 cannot do.

In terms of technology, the iPhone's ease of use should be applauded, but that in itself isn't revolutionary enough to be judged "ground-breaking", except when it comes from Apple. Apparently.

no other phone in existence has been publicised as much as the iphone, but why on earth shouldn't it have been?

the bbc does not report on figures in sport and entertainment because they particularly like or support them - they report on them because of their successes, their popularity and because people want to know more about them.

time and time again apple manage to produce groundbreaking products which work and work well. established phone manufacturers have tried for years to come up with a device that achieves everything the iphone has but have failed. if nokia had developed a product as revolutionary and as well received as the iphone, i have no doubt that the bbc would be highlighting it too. why therefore shouldn't the bbc report on such an innovation, particularly one as popular as iphone?

i have absolutely no interest in linux but i do not take offence at the seemingly never ending cycle of stories about the latest open source developments.

just switch off.

Look at all the posts complaining about the use of Front Page status, Breaking News logos, and such. Its a rediculous amount for a limited upgrade for a phone that was launched with 3 year-old technology in the first place.

The big question remains unanswered, where's the launch coverage on the 大象传媒 for Nokia, Samsung, LG, HTC, Blackberry and a multitude of other, higher volume sellers?

No where!

Until you cover ALL manufacturers equally, then you will always be accused of favoring Apple.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I will give you the fact that you have showed more restraint this time around, I myself complained multiple times when the original iPhone was announced because of the sheer hysteria with which the 大象传媒 covered the event.

However, this still does not excuse the fact that in covering this announcement the 大象传媒 are giving FREE advertising to an Apple product. Now if the 大象传媒 ran a comparison service where multiple reviews of new technology could be discussed it would be a different matter, but as you do not then NO product (however much you mac heads will love it) should be given any coverage at all (well maybe if they exploded when you turned them on, or something equally newsworthy).

I trust the 大象传媒, I understand its liberal bias, even crave it after going abroad and only have the likes of Sky and Fox News to view, but even when you yourselves admit that there are better products available then the iPhone I must question why you give the iPhone this proportion of coverage and hype (free Apple products for 大象传媒 Editors perhaps?).

I would have to say that the launch of Vista got too much free advertising from all angles, in comparison, the iPhone 3G has barely scratched the surface.

I wish the bbc would get 'open source' or standards not just apple compatible, or windows vista friendly.

But since the bbc don't 'get' that we should all understand why this is the reason why it is bad when the bbc is at doing 'internet things'.

examples: windows codecs, and incompatible flash versions.

If the bbc wish to do things a certain way then please allow us to parody you for your hero worship of the 'i-phone'.

The problem is that the perception is that Apple are given much more coverage than, say, Nokia, LG or SE despite the fact that they sell many more phones than Apple.

Apple are an exciting company and I do believe they should get coverage, however a simple article count shows that their coverage - particularly with reference to the iPhone is disproportionate.

The 大象传媒 are certainly not Apple heads, if it was an Apple centric organisation it would make sure it's site works properly on Apple's main browser, Safari. I'm regularly amazed at how badly the 大象传媒 treats Mac users especially with the sloppy reporting we see about Apple products. Remember that truly awful article by your resident Mac user about the security of OSX and the potential for Viruses?

Back to the iPhone, of course it's news worthy. One might wish to point out that feature wise it stacks up poorly against the competition, perhaps that's correct but that in itself is news!

I would just like to say that I have heard a lot about this upgraded version of this phone on the Radio 1

Can I just say that I have heard alot about this upgraded version of this phone on the Radio 1 news bulletins so to say that there has been no coverage of this phone on tv or radio apart from specialist business coverage is just false. I have never heard anything about the new releases of other mobile phones on Radio 1.

At #11 : If the 大象传媒 could make Safari "work properly", they'd roll up the media business and start turning water into high-octane fuel instead.

You only have to watch the video of the 3G iPhone launch to realise that there are far too many Apple and Palm geeks out there - and in here - who have trouble keeping their anger under control when it comes to media coverage and comment about their weapons of choice. Fact: you can't please everyone all of the time.
Fact: there are many out there who need to get a life and cut, or at least stretch, the technology umbilical cord.
Fact: i love my Apple iMac and Vista laptop but I don't feel compelled to rush to the shops to buy an MP3 player/new phone/etc.
Fact: the 大象传媒 coverage on this topic has been spot on.

Blimey,

It seems someone read my thoughts in the comments section of Maggie's blog.

I have just read Jeremy Hillman's opinion of my blog post, with comments from Rory about accusations of the 大象传媒 being MacHeads etc.

WHAT?
I don't think the 大象传媒 are any more Mac biased than me; although someone is posting in my blog that he thinks I am in cahoots with Steve Jobs and the 大象传媒!

ALSO
I am NOT anti-Mac or anti-大象传媒. I love my Mac and I am a contributor to 大象传媒 radio and a member of the 大象传媒 radio 4 listening panel - I am actually a card carrying 大象传媒 fanboy!

I simply asked a question which no one has responded to:
"What is the dividing line between reporting on the launch of a new product and giving a product pre-launch publicity?"

My original questions were all about how big a company needs to be, before the launch of one of it's products can be promoted on the 大象传媒 for free. Let's admit here, 大象传媒 coverage is worth a fortune.

My crappy little blog got over a thousand views since you mentioned it a couple of hours ago. I have no idea what the coverage of Apple must have created?

Anyhow Jeremy, as my blog usually gets 1 visitor a month, I wouldn't let my opinions cheese you off too much.

It would be interesting though, if someone could answer the question.


Jim

The difference between the iPhone and the other mobile phones about at the moment is that Apple have produced a real "game changing" device.

The 大象传媒 recognise the fact that the iPhone is "different" - for example, many of the applications that the iPhone provides have been available in other smart phones - but none have even come close in bringing the whole package together in such a user friendly package. And Apple has the track record of establishing or enabling new technology into the main stream (second to none):

The Personal Computer (Apple II);
Windows, Mouse, Icon, Pointer (Macintosh);
Word and Excel both developed by MS on the Mac before conquering the world on the PC;
The iPod (MP3 players had been around for a couple of years before Apple made its game changing device).

Etc

To see the future, you watch Apple.

It is reassuring and refreshing that 大象传媒 does an introspective and asks the questions about whether they have been fair in their reporting.

From my perspective it comes down to hype. Everyone with an ounce of sense knows that the events of the past week have been a victory of style and marketing over substance. As Rory himself correctly points out, this is simply an incremental upgrade (in the same vain as the 8GB upgrade of the N95), with no new innovations. Apple did a number on the journalists by making it out to be more than that, and the journalists fell for it.

Just because something is "the talk of Twitter" (don't get me started on this nich茅 website that the 大象传媒 seems to fawn over), doesn't necessarily make it news-worthy.
"Big Brother" is currently the talk of the tabloids... do we want the 大象传媒 full of BB stories? (answer is "no" by the way).

The charge is not that the 大象传媒 are Apple fan-boys, it's that they succumbed hook-line-and-sinker to the marketing machine. Don't perpetuate the hype - cut through it.

I think that the point has been made now, through the responses on various blogs and comment, that a significant proportion of the audience, and licence payers, are not emotionally invested in Apple products as objects of desire, irrespective of their actual capabilities.

As shareholders in the Corporation, in one way or another, it's good to have this fact noted.

I would proffer that one of the reasons the story proved so popular was that those of the above persuasion were interested to read the tone of the coverage as much as the content.

As for the Twitter angle, the subtext was, 'oh my, Twitter's all a twitter about the new iPhone, are you?'

The total effect of the coverage is like building a cairn, passers-by only add one little pebble, a link here, a thumbnail there, a short paragraph, distributed through out the 大象传媒 site, and soon you have what looks like a campaign, that nobody authored.

Unfortunately for you, you have 'problems' with both Apple lovers and haters.

The Apple fans are still annoyed with the iPlayer situation, and how you are too connected to the company in Redmond. In my opinion, I expected an optimised iPlayer for the iPhone / iPod touch, but not a big deal.

However, the Apple haters doesn't like the fact that the iPhone gets special treatment. So does it? In my opinion, NO! If you love or hate the device, you can not deny the positive results it is having on the industry. Innovation has entered the industry finally. Over the next few years, no matter what phone you have, the introduction of the iPhone will have a positive effect on it.

I do feel sorry for the 大象传媒 with this issue. I remember an episode of Click, where viewers' emails were all concerned about how you were not reporting enough on Apple or Microsoft.

You can never win with some people.

PS. I do like your blogs. I like the more personal journalism with them, that you would not get in a normal article.

Thanks.

@digital_elysium

An extremely well written and well thought out comment!


Jim Connolly

Come on...3G..this is europe.

Phones with 3G first came out about 4 yrs ago in the Uk.

We're now on HSDPA at a minimum, phones can also tap into wi-fi, do video conferences etc...

and the iphone, its got 3g and gps now. Wow thats breaking the mould.

I think basically its a poncy phone, which is limited in so many ways. The question to ask is this...if it had HTC on the device would it get such exposure? no i didn't think so

To all those people saying that there is no other coverage of rival mobile phones, I give you this link:



I do admit it isn't exactly on the front page, but still, it is there.

I think the perception of "excessive" coverage is cumulative - World+Dog is talking about it, so if the 大象传媒 is doing it too, it's much "more" than it needs.

Or something.

Hell, I don't know - the only good Mac is a big one :P

@james_a_herbert

NO ONE has said there were no over phones covered. It's the crazy level of coverage iPhone has received that some, like me, are interested in.

Jim Connolly

It's hard to imagine a technology site not reporting on this and I really don't understand the criticism of the 大象传媒.

It's no secret that big product launches are aimed at catching press attention. This isn't limited to technology. Most large companies provide journalists with statistics in the hope that their name will be mentioned. They also stage charity events to get column inches. PR companies are paid to do just that. Such practice isn't just limited to companies either; political parties do it too.

The extent to which the 大象传媒 bows to these tactics is an interesting debate. They have to report as much news as they can to remain competitive, and a lot of news comes from press releases and events, but they also have a reputation for impartiality to consider.

The difficulty is that Apple, more than most, has a reputation for relying on media hype to fuel sales. Relaying the hype, or even objectively reporting on it, can be seen as playing into Apple's hands.

I don't think the iPhone launch was covered too much by the 大象传媒. I'm an iPhone owner, so obviously I have a vested interest, I must admit that. However, the articles by the 大象传媒 were balanced in my opinion. And a blog from the event itself should report on the event itself. If anything, I would describe their coverage overall as restrained.

The iPhone has changed the mobile phone market. I think it's hard to argue otherwise. The iPod has made history because it brought existing technology to the masses by making it easy to use and (dare I say it) 'cool'. The speculation is whether Apple will achieve the same in the mobile phone market.

I think the 大象传媒 needs to be careful, but given the significance of the product and the style of the articles, I think the balance was right. As I said, it's hard to imagine a technology site not reporting on the new iPhone launch.

Dammed if you do dammed if you don't,

I find these jamboree's ,they have periodically, worryingly compelling. like some religious cult. Perhaps its that, which inspires such hugely polarized views,
I use mac and PC. Mac is better by a country mile, but not in any measurable way. just the experience and ease of use. Apple are trying to spread the word on this because until you have picked up a apple product and used it, there is no way you can understand that. The most significant thing in these latest announcements was the price drop, now they have a Trojan horse that will get Taken back into the castle. Would Nokia or IBM get the same attention with a similar product, No, but they have not set out the same Messianic agenda either.

I believe.

Hugo Chav

Jus to labour the point, I think it is a bit misleading to say it was just "one article and one blog".

There were two blogs by Maggie (one at the PR launch, and one about the hype), and one on the impact of the iPhone launch on Twitter by Darren.

There was one main page article (which was prominent) and one on Newsbeat. It was also reported throughout the day on Radio 1.

The past month there has not been a day go by without some website publishing "leaked" specification, mockups or secret photographs. The iPhone was a highly anticipated news item and at the Apple developers conference this week it seems everyone is porting applications to the iPhone.
Whether by accident or design Apple have created a new platform technology for mobile computing. The coverage on the 大象传媒 seems appropriate.

When Apple produces a product, it is a tool. To criticise the new iPhone on the basis that it doesn't enable the shooting of rubbish videos and only has a medium resolution camera is to ignore the tool in favour of the toys.

The fact is, with a 3G iPhone I will be able to carry one superbly well put together, slim, lightweight, pocket-sized device that will allow me to communicate and find information effectively in just about any location. Like many other phones, I can store music and pictures on it - but I'll have far a better interface through which to enjoy them.

The availability of third party a VOIP application, seamlessly switching calls (by some magic I can't fathom) from 3G to VOIP to save me money is utterly unique. That Apple has enabled a third party to do this is truly forward thinking.

Well if there is a hype it is because does offer a fresh and different look, with its tilt senor, cool interface. For me the argument stops here. I work in a large orgnisation, with lots of engineers and sales people 1200). There is only one iphone bought by someone who owns a mac :-).

I am a gadget freak and I won 5 phones with 3 simultaeous contracts (I know I know ... I can't help it). I would love an Iphone, but to be honest, even if it is totally free (plus contract of course) to me it is still a toy. A true phone has all the latest connectivity solutions, unlocked, the freedom to install any software you like and the freedom to customize your phone to your liking from any source you wish. The freedom to synchronize to calendar, contacts, emails etc... from any source that offers the best reliable service. Lastly, good battery and the ability tohold on to a signal like a bulldog.

Cool interface, tilt sensors, cameras are nice secondary features and not important in deciding whether to buy a phone or not. LOock me into one source and you lose me as a customer even i fyou give me the contract free as well :-)

Apple polarizes the debate, there's no doubt about that. There's no way you can avoid the usual fanboy vs. hat3rz bunfight, so best not to try. I do think it's a pity, though, that some of the people who come on here professing to be experts in all things tech, seem unable to make a distinction between the 大象传媒 reporting the news, and 大象传媒 reporters blogging about the news.

Use your editorial judgement, then publish (or not) and be damned. That's what we pay you for! And as for blogging ... I don't think you can ever do too much, on Apple or any other subject. Keep it up.

There is no doubt that the 大象传媒 favours apple products. They say podcast-this and podcast-that so often now that people actually believe they are podcasts: they are not, they are music downloads (or other tyopes of downloads) not specific to ipods.

Every time the 大象传媒 says podcast, they give advertising to Apple and ipods. Why don't they use the proper terms?

Apple are highly overrated, but they are great at advertising.

Is the ipod better than other products? no, but the look good - style over substance. Incompatible with the standards. Why? because they want to corner the market: marketing over quality.

Itunes: exactly the same: a horrible piece of
software. Again, incompatible, messes up all the standard tags. But, hey, it looks good and is the 'in' thing. Mediamonkey is much better and free.

But the sheep can't think for themselves.

Paulmarkj, your comments simply don't make any sense. The English language is absolutely littered with words that are trade names, or which are derived from trade names, and which everyone uses, every day, without a second thought. To try to claim that the 大象传媒 'favours' Apple products for using the word podcast is as ridiculous as claiming someone has a secret agenda for using any of these:

Hoover (instead of vacuum cleaner)
Portacabin (instead of portable accommodation)
Rollerblades (instead of inline skates)
Bubble Wrap (air-filled plastic wrapper)
Jacuzzi (Whirlpool spa)
Tannoy (Public address system)

Need I go on?

I think Rory is right - the coverage isn't over the top. This is a big story in technology - full stop. Everyone is writing about (and has been for months). We've written over 20 stories on in the last seven days. If the 大象传媒's three (or four?) stories is over the top then what does that make us? Still, each one is relevant and valid.

Oh, and the lack of camera/video upgrade means Nokia might just be able to rest easy for a little while. Maybe not for long though as surely that'll be next on Apple's list.

Oh and oh, the term "podcasting" came not from Apple but from Ben Hammersley in The Guardian when he suggested it as a name for a then new idea of distributed audio "...all the ingredients are there for a new boom in amateur radio. But what to call it? Audioblogging? Podcasting? GuerillaMedia?"

Sure, there's an iPod reference there, but given the first "podcast" scripts were written specifically for that device, it's kinda valid. Worth noting though that the scripts were written independently of Apple.

To JimConnolly

Yeah your right, guess i miss-read some comments. Sorry.

But i do have to say this, I can see why the 大象传媒 has covered the iPhone so much. You have to admit, its a sexy piece of kit that get people that aren't usually all that interested in technology, interested in technology. More people want to hear about the iPhone than say, the HTC Touch Diamond. The 大象传媒 provides what the mainstream of it's users want.
And thats the iPhone.

James_a_herbert - consider that you may have it backwards, and that more people want to hear about the iPhone BECAUSE it's been pushed so hard by the 大象传媒 and other media sources.

Apple's success isn't from UI development, product design or software but from marketing. Their marketers are responsible for everything from the consistent brand awareness (stick an 'i' in front of it!), their disproportional media coverage, product placement in films/tv, through to the projection of apple users as creative behemoths which sucked-in adopters want to identify with (remember the ads with the peep show duo?). Every other tech company would sell their souls for the marketing dept but not much else.

#17: as much as I might like Apple products, this is just hysterical revisionism.

In Europe the iPhone changes nothing. The EU market is quite congested enough without another player coming in. Yes, the Ui is nice, but you know what, the rest of the features aren't actually all that stellar.

As for Apple's role in the enabling or adoption of technology, these are way more contentious. There are those who would say Xerox PARC's WIMP system first found mass market breakthrough on machines like the Atari ST and Amiga, before the Mac went mass market.

As for word processing and spreadsheets, WordStar on the PC and apple II's VisiCalc and Lotus 123 for the PC were mass -market killer apps long before MS decided to write Word and Excel. Indeed, 123 is credited with actually starting the PC explosion in some quarters.

Apple do design. and boy is it good at it, but it also needs to vertically integrate products to get that consistency of experience that the horizontal integration of Microsoft and PC world can only dream of.
Hence the tying of iPod to iTunes, for example. That's the price of the experience.

I am by no means a Mac hater. I use Macs, Linux and Windows daily. I have an iPod. I like Apple's kit, but the downside is the hysterical hoopla you get around every product launch or upgrade. This year's WWDC keynote was mostly filler and not much killer for a product that should have been out in europe at least 6 months ago, probably longer, to be credible. The single network thing's not helping any either.

Put it into perspective. The iPhone is a passable phone with a good UI. nothing else.

The 大象传媒 and almost all the rest of the media have clearly and repeatedly succumbed to the Apple marketing machine. They are quite simply brilliant.

To deny this would be perverse. But at least the 大象传媒 are aware of the issue, unlike Hollywood and most print media.

And Apples design values are excellent, at least visually.

BUT

Although I dislike the M$ juggernaut as much as the next man, when I'm spending hard earned cash I buy what has the best functionality at the best price, not what looks prettiest or has the most "cool" cachet.

And that's not Apple, mac.

Rory - 2 very simple questions:

1) Do you honestly think it justified occupying position THREE on the 大象传媒 News homepage?

2) Do you honestly believe it warranted the red Breaking News graphic besides it?

I think this gets to the heart of why most people (including Mac users like myself) found it over-the-top.

I've posted this question on the other blogs related to this and I'd appreciate an answer.

Have any of the 大象传媒 journalists writing stories on Apple products taken advantage of the discount offered to journalists by Apple on their products and if so are they prepared to declare that they have?

It's a simple enough question and should be simple enough to answer.

@dotconnect

Good luck with getting an answer!

I've been after an answer from ANYONE at the 大象传媒 for almost a week!


Jim Connolly

@clankylad

REALLY?

The problem, I feel, is not specifically the Apple one or even the iPhone one, but what actually appears to be 'lazy journalism'.

I care not about the Apples vs Microsoft debate (my first Apple was an Apple ][ a few years ago now). I've been a Microsoft user since time of the original IBM PC too.

So, what bothers me is that events such as the iPhone relaunch is just a marketing set-up. The device is not being put on sale today. It is being 'announced'. It is only NEWS because the Apple PR machine says so.

You need to consider the effect, too, of not just the text in the news report, but the impact of images and the on-screen time of the images of the product in associated videos.

Why, for example, is there little 'investigative' reporting of Tech stuff? It is always PR events. The nearest you get is things like your "oh, ADSL is slower further from the exchange" which, given that this is clearly in the specification and has been for over a decade, isn't news either.

Interestingly once again the 大象传媒 audio and video content has stopped working on Apple's Safari Browser.

I wonder how long until it's fixed this time? No doubt people will still claim that the 大象传媒 is bias towards Apple. When the site doesn't work on an Apple Mac I very much doubt it.

Who cares.. I mean, seriously, who really cares?

I read the article with interest. I was pleased to read something that didn't involve people killing each other for a change. But do I care? No.. Will I go out and buy an iPhone because of it? No.. Without this blog, would I even have remembered the article next week? Probably not..

I really think that some people have got too much time on their hands.. This world is run by computers these days, so really, who cares if it made the front page??

Not me, I've got a life instead!

@clankylad and JimConnolly

I was informed in an email from 大象传媒 News online on 13/11/07 that:-

"As far as i am aware no 大象传媒 staff get an Apple discount. I have checked with HR on this."

So there you have it, they say that they don't.

I've read Private Eye report that they do, and from other internet sources also that they do.

So is this misinformation from 大象传媒 News online, or mis-reporting from the UKs leading satirical magazine?

@Tengsted
If my wife works for Apple, I will get a discount. If I work for the 大象传媒 and my wife works for Apple, I will still get a discount.. Does that suddenly make me bad? (A bad apple??)

i have used a MAC computer when i was in school....

i prefer my P.C. and my laptop.

Tengsted - I'm also unaware of any Apple discount for 大象传媒 staff, but there certainly is one for members of the National Union of Journalists. Visit the NUJ site and under 'services' and 'other benefits' there's a link which says 'A wide range of Mac kit is available to NUJ members at great prices at the NUJ Apple Store'.

Not being a member, I wasn't able to access the store section. However, I'd suggest that it's likely that most if not all 大象传媒 journalists ARE NUJ members and DO get discounts.

I've got no problem with that in general. However, I think that for journalists writing technology stories for a taxpayer-funded state broadcaster it IS an issue if they are receiving discounted products from one of the major companies in that sector, especially if their partiality has been questioned, as it has here. Which is why I think they should declare if they have taken advantage of the discount.

The Times Online had two articles, a comment piece and a photo gallery.

Why on earth are people singling out the Beeb like this?

Get a life.

Researcher 237269 - I'm singling out the 大象传媒 because - unlike the Times - I have to pay for it and therefore expect impartiality.

clanky, I think you're mixing up "receiving" and "could get".

Journos at the 大象传媒 don't get a discount on an iPhone in return for writing an article.

Neither is an NUJ discount dependent on the amount of coverage a journo gives anything.

The journos at the 大象传媒 could write "It's great", write "it's crap", or not write anything at all - they still get the discount.

So it's kind of misleading to claim that their *ability* to get something at a discount colours their reviews/coverage. the two have no connection.

Come on guys, get a grip here ... Claiming the 大象传媒 is promoting Apple because it has "podcasts"? I suppose that means that every blogging platform in the world is also, by definition, promoting Apple because it has "podcast" ability.

Are people really *this* desperate to try to weasel out of the TV license fee any way they can?

It seems to me that the main point is being largely ignored due to the number of people who have an issue with Apple:

The coverage is "disproportionate" because the public interest is disproportionate! - The 大象传媒 has a duty to reflect this and to expect lots of coverage of other devices (that people arent as interested in) for the sake of balance would be pointless. People are not so stupid as to think the iphone is the only technology available - I dont like Manchester United but I would be dismayed if the 大象传媒 stopped showing football out of fear of giving the club too much advertising (they are a business too, after all). Nor do I want endless hours of boring lower league coverage in the interest of balance.

The 大象传媒 does not have an Apple bias, the iplayer client is still not available for download for Macs. Some parts of the 大象传媒 website still don't work correctly on Safari.

I would guess the coverage of the iphone is because a lot of license payers are interested in the product.

Also the 大象传媒 site is massive and if you are not interested in reading about a certain story you don't have to read it.

Moonwolf - Of course the discount doesn鈥檛 make anyone write more positive stories about Apple. But the very fact that this thread appears on the Editors section rather than the Tech section would suggest that there have been sufficient complaints about the impartiality of the 大象传媒鈥檚 Apple coverage for it to be an issue.

I鈥榤 a civil servant, and as such I 鈥渕ust not accept gifts, hospitality or OTHER BENEFITS OF ANY KIND from a third party which might be seen to compromise [my] personal and professional integrity.鈥�

The 大象传媒 is funded through a tax. I do not see why 大象传媒 technology journalists should not be held to the same standards as other public employees.

May I ask why my previous post has been referred to the moderators and when it might expect to be seen? As far as I'm aware it did not break any of the house rules.

With the greatest respect to Rory, he is simply not telling the truth with his one news story, one blog comment.

There were at least two news stories. One published in the run up to the release that significantly helped to inflate the hype.

There are currently 3 blog entries on dot.life dedicated to the iPhone, plus a significant mention in a fourth - and now there is also a blog about the iphone coverage on dot.life and Editiors blogs.

Rory may only have been personally responsible for what he said, but the 大象传媒 is responsible for the whole coverage - so let's start this debate with the correct facts.

Personally I find the fact that Rory was less than honest about the actual coverage the product got far more disturbing than the question about advertising the product.

Whether there is an imbalance in the coverage can be determined in a simple way. By searching "iPhone" on the website returns >70 references, while "Nokia N95" returns 11 - most of which are in articles about the iPhone, and a story where a poor guy was mugged for his N95. Presumerably the thief is less discriminating than the 大象传媒!

"Firefox aims for download record" is the current top story - even a nice big logo next to it.

Can you imagine the outrage if it were Apple's free download of Safari!

Are you talking about outrage over coverage of Apple's free download of Safari, or outrage about Apple's free download *of* Safari? :)

Just how could the 3G iPhone help to promote for consumer's My Project Plan named "The Electric Vehicle Free Conversion Foundation (EVFCF)" located here:

I have gotten the short end of the stick from the United States Government, little recognition of it even when automakers continue to fail and the economics of America crashes affecting every nations economic plans which involved automakers and the UAW. A clear grass root plan is all I devised which would curve the spending needs of consumers, its the ideal solution for all nations to consider. This plan needs some support, its no Jeff Paul plan for Internet Shortcuts but it is a big Shortcut for consumers and does not depend on government funding.

I am still in the design phase which means that anyone that gives me some real good advice about the administrative issues could see their suggestion put into action immediately, I am appealing to all the world to give me advice and help get this started in America. President Obama has not given me anything which I could depend on, in fact he has broken the ribbon on other projects that are failing or doomed to fail and I have shown this in My Project Plan many times. I go by 'The Jonalist', Please help!