<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Why Journalism Organizations Should Reconsider Their Crush on Apple&#8217;s iPad</title>
	<atom:link href="http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/</link>
	<description>Creating a User&#039;s Guide to Democratized Media</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Sep 2010 14:15:46 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: dg</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-2308</link>
		<dc:creator>dg</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 20:10:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-2308</guid>
		<description>A journey down memory lane- Apple 1984 commercial depicting &#039;big blue&#039; aka IBM.  Apple wanted to picture IBM as the tryanny system, which was closed and brainwashing the mind.  The orwellian company would be defeated by the individual although I found it funny that the individual was throwing a hammer aka like old Russia under Communism.  Now it makes sense Apple just wanted to be the new &#039;mind control&#039; thought police on the block.  

The fact that macs have been easy to use made them a first computer.  The fact that they wouldn&#039;t really let you play with the files and other items made them a computer to dump when you came of age.  Now microsoft is similar so there is a gravitation toward linux and other systems.  

Overbearing control makes the market shift elsewhere.  Companies have the right to market products- people can purchase or not.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A journey down memory lane- Apple 1984 commercial depicting &#8216;big blue&#8217; aka IBM.  Apple wanted to picture IBM as the tryanny system, which was closed and brainwashing the mind.  The orwellian company would be defeated by the individual although I found it funny that the individual was throwing a hammer aka like old Russia under Communism.  Now it makes sense Apple just wanted to be the new &#8216;mind control&#8217; thought police on the block.  </p>
<p>The fact that macs have been easy to use made them a first computer.  The fact that they wouldn&#8217;t really let you play with the files and other items made them a computer to dump when you came of age.  Now microsoft is similar so there is a gravitation toward linux and other systems.  </p>
<p>Overbearing control makes the market shift elsewhere.  Companies have the right to market products- people can purchase or not.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dros</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1729</link>
		<dc:creator>Dros</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 09 Apr 2010 13:53:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1729</guid>
		<description>Lexus is owned by Toyota. : P</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lexus is owned by Toyota. : P</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Charles Pinneo</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1410</link>
		<dc:creator>Charles Pinneo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 11 Mar 2010 10:58:19 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1410</guid>
		<description>Why were the music companies stupid to give up so much? Record companies are selling recordings, are they not? Was there an alternative to selling recordings through iTunes? Wasn&#039;t it true that millions of young people were stealing music through Napster? What was the alternative?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why were the music companies stupid to give up so much? Record companies are selling recordings, are they not? Was there an alternative to selling recordings through iTunes? Wasn&#8217;t it true that millions of young people were stealing music through Napster? What was the alternative?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ward Mundy</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1409</link>
		<dc:creator>Ward Mundy</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Mar 2010 22:58:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1409</guid>
		<description>Long live the Soup Nazi.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Long live the Soup Nazi.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Gillmor</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1374</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Gillmor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 15:26:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1374</guid>
		<description>Apple is the Lexus of computers, not the Toyota. But it isn&#039;t just secretive to a point, it&#039;s secretive to a fault. This is at least partly about PR as opposed to necessity; consider how far ahead of time it announced the iPhone (FCC rules essentially forced them into the open earlier than they&#039;d have preferred) and how incredibly well that worked out for them.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apple is the Lexus of computers, not the Toyota. But it isn&#8217;t just secretive to a point, it&#8217;s secretive to a fault. This is at least partly about PR as opposed to necessity; consider how far ahead of time it announced the iPhone (FCC rules essentially forced them into the open earlier than they&#8217;d have preferred) and how incredibly well that worked out for them.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gary</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1373</link>
		<dc:creator>Gary</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Feb 2010 14:55:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1373</guid>
		<description>I can&#039;t defend Jobs on every front. But he has to be secretive to a point, because so many other corporations want to shoot him down. Apple is a Fortune 100 company, not a govt. agency. 

Think of Apple as the Toyota of computers, good customer service, good product, until something goes wrong.  There isn&#039;t a computer related company in the world that wouldn&#039;t want to knock Apple off its pedastal. So freedom of the press at Apple is just not possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I can&#8217;t defend Jobs on every front. But he has to be secretive to a point, because so many other corporations want to shoot him down. Apple is a Fortune 100 company, not a govt. agency. </p>
<p>Think of Apple as the Toyota of computers, good customer service, good product, until something goes wrong.  There isn&#8217;t a computer related company in the world that wouldn&#8217;t want to knock Apple off its pedastal. So freedom of the press at Apple is just not possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Gillmor</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1370</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Gillmor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 18:08:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1370</guid>
		<description>Good grief. By what possible logic could you infer that I&#039;m suggesting news organizations should keep doing what they&#039;ve been doing? You could not possibly have read anything else I&#039;ve been writing to believe that.

I don&#039;t hate Apple. I&#039;m a customer, and think highly of much of what they&#039;ve done (as I wrote above).</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Good grief. By what possible logic could you infer that I&#8217;m suggesting news organizations should keep doing what they&#8217;ve been doing? You could not possibly have read anything else I&#8217;ve been writing to believe that.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t hate Apple. I&#8217;m a customer, and think highly of much of what they&#8217;ve done (as I wrote above).</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Brian</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1369</link>
		<dc:creator>Brian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 17:19:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1369</guid>
		<description>Dan, if you are positing that newspapers and magazines are better off staying as traditional print media, I can only shake my head. Have you looked at the financial condition of most print media these days? They&#039;re on life support. And what constitutes a significant chunk of their operating costs? Printing and physical distribution. If newspapers and magazines are to survive, something must change.

You might hate Apple, and it appears that you want to villanize the the company. I&#039;m not a fanboy, but ask yourself: who else can help print media make the transition to be viable? The truth is that Apple has a ready market via iTunes, and the potential to deliver that market with the iPad. Of course, over time, news media will seek other forms of distribution. But the fact is that nobody, not even Amazon, have the infrastructure and available captive market in place to make this happen on the scale that Apple can. This is not a matter of what company you like or don&#039;t, or what piece of hardware you prefer. It&#039;s just business.

I&#039;ve read a lot of sniping that Apple screwed the record companies. Bullfeathers. If not for Apple, piracy would have only been more rampant. Record companies were losing their shirts before iTunes came along. As for alternatives, did you really want PressPlay? Of course not. Apple and iTunes have succeeded because it was suddenly painless for consumers to buy music and other media. Instead of stealing, people WILLINGLY paid for their media instead. As a result, record companies and other media content owners have done better than they are willing to admit. If not for Apple, we would not be enjoying what we take for granted today.

This appears to have been lost on you, Dan.

Yes, I know that newspaper, magazine and book publishers have issues with Apple having the direct relationship with their customers and their credit cards. They bristle at the thought of being held at an arm&#039;s length from demographic data or building a relationship with their readers. I get all that. My hunch is that this is all part of negotiations. And I have a feeling that in the end, this information will be shared with them, especially as competitors to the iPad come to the fore. But if you want to see electronic media publishing flourish, it has to start somewhere, and given their financial condition, quickly. 

Safe behind your blog and low-cost distribution system, you may forget how expensive it is to publish on paper. But as we are learning, the real asset of any newspaper, magazine or book publisher is no longer their printing press, but the content they create and/or own. If the publishers want to own their distribution, it&#039;s up to them to build a better mousetrap. But truth be told, the media companies have had years to do this, and they have failed miserably. That Apple is poised to succeed might make you bristle, but it should also tell you that the company&#039;s approach to the market is fundamentally sound. 

Dan, I challenge you to see beyond your obvious dislike for Steve Jobs and Apple, and look objectively at what the company can do to save media publishers from themselves.You might not like that. But to lose a newspaper like The New York Times, or a great magazine, because they could not adapt would be a fate far worse.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dan, if you are positing that newspapers and magazines are better off staying as traditional print media, I can only shake my head. Have you looked at the financial condition of most print media these days? They&#8217;re on life support. And what constitutes a significant chunk of their operating costs? Printing and physical distribution. If newspapers and magazines are to survive, something must change.</p>
<p>You might hate Apple, and it appears that you want to villanize the the company. I&#8217;m not a fanboy, but ask yourself: who else can help print media make the transition to be viable? The truth is that Apple has a ready market via iTunes, and the potential to deliver that market with the iPad. Of course, over time, news media will seek other forms of distribution. But the fact is that nobody, not even Amazon, have the infrastructure and available captive market in place to make this happen on the scale that Apple can. This is not a matter of what company you like or don&#8217;t, or what piece of hardware you prefer. It&#8217;s just business.</p>
<p>I&#8217;ve read a lot of sniping that Apple screwed the record companies. Bullfeathers. If not for Apple, piracy would have only been more rampant. Record companies were losing their shirts before iTunes came along. As for alternatives, did you really want PressPlay? Of course not. Apple and iTunes have succeeded because it was suddenly painless for consumers to buy music and other media. Instead of stealing, people WILLINGLY paid for their media instead. As a result, record companies and other media content owners have done better than they are willing to admit. If not for Apple, we would not be enjoying what we take for granted today.</p>
<p>This appears to have been lost on you, Dan.</p>
<p>Yes, I know that newspaper, magazine and book publishers have issues with Apple having the direct relationship with their customers and their credit cards. They bristle at the thought of being held at an arm&#8217;s length from demographic data or building a relationship with their readers. I get all that. My hunch is that this is all part of negotiations. And I have a feeling that in the end, this information will be shared with them, especially as competitors to the iPad come to the fore. But if you want to see electronic media publishing flourish, it has to start somewhere, and given their financial condition, quickly. </p>
<p>Safe behind your blog and low-cost distribution system, you may forget how expensive it is to publish on paper. But as we are learning, the real asset of any newspaper, magazine or book publisher is no longer their printing press, but the content they create and/or own. If the publishers want to own their distribution, it&#8217;s up to them to build a better mousetrap. But truth be told, the media companies have had years to do this, and they have failed miserably. That Apple is poised to succeed might make you bristle, but it should also tell you that the company&#8217;s approach to the market is fundamentally sound. </p>
<p>Dan, I challenge you to see beyond your obvious dislike for Steve Jobs and Apple, and look objectively at what the company can do to save media publishers from themselves.You might not like that. But to lose a newspaper like The New York Times, or a great magazine, because they could not adapt would be a fate far worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dan Gillmor</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1368</link>
		<dc:creator>Dan Gillmor</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:31:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1368</guid>
		<description>Apple never had to create a store where it, and it alone, would decide what&#039;s suitable for people to use. The issue is the closed nature of the platform.

Apple could easily have had its curated store, with all kinds of restrictions I&#039;d never argue with, had it also opened the platform so developers could write apps for people who wanted other kinds of services and content. If they could sell their apps outside the store, everyone would be better off, except for the company that wants to own and control every possible aspect of customers&#039; experience and take a financial cut of everything that moves within the platform.

Their hypocrisy and control-freakery is all the more obvious given that you can use the iPhone browser (Safari only, of course...) to find material unsuitable for 8-year-olds. I suppose you want them to turn Safari into a G-rated access system, too?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Apple never had to create a store where it, and it alone, would decide what&#8217;s suitable for people to use. The issue is the closed nature of the platform.</p>
<p>Apple could easily have had its curated store, with all kinds of restrictions I&#8217;d never argue with, had it also opened the platform so developers could write apps for people who wanted other kinds of services and content. If they could sell their apps outside the store, everyone would be better off, except for the company that wants to own and control every possible aspect of customers&#8217; experience and take a financial cut of everything that moves within the platform.</p>
<p>Their hypocrisy and control-freakery is all the more obvious given that you can use the iPhone browser (Safari only, of course&#8230;) to find material unsuitable for 8-year-olds. I suppose you want them to turn Safari into a G-rated access system, too?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Robert</title>
		<link>http://mediactive.com/2010/02/24/why-journalism-organizations-should-reconsider-their-crush-on-apples-ipad/#comment-1367</link>
		<dc:creator>Robert</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:20:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://mediactive.com/?p=1330#comment-1367</guid>
		<description>It&#039;s being worked on ... does not require an app. The whole &quot;let&#039;s build an app for our publication&quot; is not the long term model because it&#039;s not sustainable across multiple platforms, and we will have multiple platforms in this space (a great thing).

http://www.nytimes.com/timesskimmer/
Not as rich as our lala land in our head but it&#039;s pretty nice to use. Plus, pay walls happen on the web today.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>It&#8217;s being worked on &#8230; does not require an app. The whole &#8220;let&#8217;s build an app for our publication&#8221; is not the long term model because it&#8217;s not sustainable across multiple platforms, and we will have multiple platforms in this space (a great thing).</p>
<p><a href="http://www.nytimes.com/timesskimmer/" rel="nofollow">http://www.nytimes.com/timesskimmer/</a><br />
Not as rich as our lala land in our head but it&#8217;s pretty nice to use. Plus, pay walls happen on the web today.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
