Gizmodo’s bad journalism

17 Mar 2006

Have you read the story about the guy’s MacBook Pro MagSafe connector burning up? Well, Gizmodo reported today: “MacBook Magnetic MagSafe Connector Not So Safe After All” which is a decent headline. So far, so good right? They then claimed Apple contacted Flickr and instructed them to remove the photos. This is just completely wrong. Apple contacted the guy (Rogier Mulder) whose MacBook Pro was damaged and asked him to remove the photos. Mulder agreed and complemented Apple on their support of the issue on the flickr post. And check this out:

Apple’s magnetic Mag”Safe” connector on its Intel-based MacBook must be inappropriately named. How safe is a connector that bursts into flames with no provocation?

That’s just plain inaccurate. Mulder said on his flickr post that his cats were around the MacBook Pro, so no one knows what actually happened. Gizmodo then links to an article entitled “Apple Censored Pics of Torched MacBook Power Connector“. How can you call voluntary removal of pictures censorship is beyond me, but that’s beside the point. What has Gizmodo turned into? Are they going to be the National Inquirer of the web? They’ve since corrected the mistatement about the Apple contacting Flickr but then they go on to say this:

Maybe Apple should change the name of this product to the FireBook. It’ll be interesting to see how the Cupertino company spins this one. Your move, Apple.

It doesn’t look like Apple is doing any spinning at all Gizmodo, you are.

Update: Flickr has responded to the false allegations.

10 Responses to Gizmodo’s bad journalism

Bwana

March 18th, 2006 at 9:43 am

Gizmodo clearly was in the wrong here. They reported an inaccurate story with gross exaggerations and slander based on hearsay. Clearly, this is an isolated incident for which no one knows the cause. The rest is irrelevant. Gizmodo should have reported that it happened, and what was confirmed by the owner. That’s it. It’s a shame, even Newsvine has higher reporting standards than this.

Even Flickr had a word to say about this. It’s insane.

ppinette

March 18th, 2006 at 2:35 pm

Of course they didn’t want those pictures out there. Why would they? Seems to me this is the first reported problem of this nature, and there were forces involved beyond Apple’s control (cats). So why would they want these pictures available to people like BigReg or blogs like Gizmodo, where assumptions will be made, and rumours started?

Gizmodo

March 18th, 2006 at 6:04 pm

MacBook Magnetic MagSafe Connector Not So Safe After All…

Apple’s magnetic Mag”Safe” connector on its Intel-based MacBook must be inappropriately named. How safe is a connector that bursts into flames with no provocation? This happened to a MacBook belonging to Rogier Mulder, who took pictures of the conn…

Gizmodo, The Gadget Blog

March 18th, 2006 at 6:17 pm

[...] Update: A couple people have called us out on this post, saying it is, at best, overwrought. You’re totally right. Please accept my apologies. [...]

Jereme

March 19th, 2006 at 12:02 am

Since when to bloggers have a reputation of sensible journalism to uphold? Gizmodo jumped the gun, but they’ve corrected their article. However, in the end they are just a gadget blog, not a reputable news source.

It’s amazing how defensive everybody is being about this stupid isolated issue.

MacBook Magnetic MagSafe Connector Not So Safe After All - Gizmodo

March 19th, 2006 at 12:20 am

[...] Update: A couple people have called us out on this post, saying it is, at best, overwrought. You’re totally right. Please accept my apologies. [...]

Bwana

March 19th, 2006 at 12:50 am

Since when to bloggers have a reputation of sensible journalism to uphold?

When you become as big as Gizmodo, and Wired (where Gizmodo got the story from), your responsibility goes up. You have massive influence, and what you say people will take to heart. Is this the way things should be? Who knows. But it’s how it is on the internet. Techcrunch just ran an article on “The Power of Digg” [digg.com] and how it’s massive influence could possibly be used to drive stock prices up and down. My point is that misinformation at these type of outlets could be as damaging (or even more damaging) than it being on MSNBC.com or CNN.com.

It’s amazing how defensive everybody is being about this stupid isolated issue.

Sensationalism tends to do that. Had they reported it for what it was, we wouldn’t be having this discussion.

But I digress, Gizmodo has apologized for their mistake and everything’s gravy. I’m going to wait on Apple’s findings on this issue because it’s not something I want to ignore.

ppinette

March 20th, 2006 at 3:57 am

BigReg, I apologize, at the time of writing I was reading several different articles on this story and their respective comments, and must have attributed someone else’s comments to you. Reading over what you wrote now, I see no assumptions.

In any case, I don’t blame Apple for wanting to cover this up. If they can determine the cause of the problem, they could possibly anticipate whether to expect widespread cases. Wanting to keep it quiet in the meantime seems obvious.

And you’re right, they should have tossed him an iPod for agreeing to take down the photos.