Log In | Register
Last week, I published an article in an effort to call out Jesus Diaz on his use of an anonymous source as the basis for an article about the "dire" health of Apple CEO Steve Jobs. Attempts to contact Diaz went unanswered.
The initial claim, provided by said unnamed source, was as follows:
Steves health is rapidly declining. Apple is choosing to remove the hype factor strategically vs letting the hype destroy apple when the inevitable news comes later this spring.
This strategic loss will be less of a bang with investors. This is why Macworld is a no-go anymore. No more Steve means no more hype. Saying they are no longer needing [Macworld] is the cover designed by the worldwide "loyalty" department.
Diaz took that scoop and used it to purchase a ticket to Fudville:
According to a previously reliable source, Apple misrepresented the reasons behind Macworld and Jobs' keynote cancellation. Allegedly, the real cause is his rapidly declining health. In fact, it may be even worse than we imagined...
Addressing the first sentence, Apple doesn't seem to have misrepresented anything, because the press release in which it was originally announced that Apple would no longer be participating in Macworld and that Phil Schiller would deliver the Keynote in the last ever appearance of Apple at Macworld never offers any sort of explanation for the decision to go with Schiller instead of Jobs:
CUPERTINO, California—December 16, 2008—Apple® today announced that this year is the last year the company will exhibit at Macworld Expo. Philip Schiller, Apple's senior vice president of Worldwide Product Marketing, will deliver the opening keynote for this year's Macworld Conference & Expo, and it will be Apple's last keynote at the show. The keynote address will be held at Moscone West on Tuesday, January 6, 2009 at 9:00 a.m. Macworld will be held at San Francisco's Moscone Center January 5-9, 2009.
Apple is reaching more people in more ways than ever before, so like many companies, trade shows have become a very minor part of how Apple reaches its customers. The increasing popularity of Apple's Retail Stores, which more than 3.5 million people visit every week, and the Apple.com website enable Apple to directly reach more than a hundred million customers around the world in innovative new ways.
Apple has been steadily scaling back on trade shows in recent years, including NAB, Macworld New York, Macworld Tokyo and Apple Expo in Paris.
Apple ignited the personal computer revolution in the 1970s with the Apple II and reinvented the personal computer in the 1980s with the Macintosh. Today, Apple continues to lead the industry in innovation with its award-winning computers, OS X operating system and iLife and professional applications. Apple is also spearheading the digital media revolution with its iPod portable music and video players and iTunes online store, and has entered the mobile phone market with its revolutionary iPhone. SOURCE
Yes, a generic explanation is offered about Macworld and tradeshows in general, but nothing is said or written to tie that explanation to Jobs' decision to forego the spotlight in 2009.
Today, Steve Jobs published one of his rare "open letters" in an effort to address the ongoing questions about his health with substantive answers:
Dear Apple Community,
For the first time in a decade, I'm getting to spend the holiday season with my family, rather than intensely preparing for a Macworld keynote.
Unfortunately, my decision to have Phil deliver the Macworld keynote set off another flurry of rumors about my health, with some even publishing stories of me on my deathbed.
I've decided to share something very personal with the Apple community so that we can all relax and enjoy the show tomorrow.
As many of you know, I have been losing weight throughout 2008. The reason has been a mystery to me and my doctors. A few weeks ago, I decided that getting to the root cause of this and reversing it needed to become my #1 priority.
Fortunately, after further testing, my doctors think they have found the cause—a hormone imbalance that has been "robbing" me of the proteins my body needs to be healthy. Sophisticated blood tests have confirmed this diagnosis.
The remedy for this nutritional problem is relatively simple and straightforward, and I've already begun treatment. But, just like I didn't lose this much weight and body mass in a week or a month, my doctors expect it will take me until late this Spring to regain it. I will continue as Apple's CEO during my recovery.
I have given more than my all to Apple for the past 11 years now. I will be the first one to step up and tell our Board of Directors if I can no longer continue to fulfill my duties as Apple's CEO. I hope the Apple community will support me in my recovery and know that I will always put what is best for Apple first.
So now I've said more than I wanted to say, and all that I am going to say, about this.
Steve SOURCE
I've emphasized the portion of the open letter which would seem to contradict the claims made by the anonymous source who provided Diaz with the dire health scoop. In fact, Jobs even appears to take a not-so-subtle swipe at "deathbed" articles much like the one posted by Diaz.
In a new article, Diaz cops to the fact that his source was wrong about Jobs' health, but tries to salvage a bit of dignity by claiming that Jobs (via Apple) lied about his reasoning for stepping out of the spotlight in '09, and by asserting that Apple PR lied to CNBCs Jim Goldman:
But we were right on something almost as important: The reason why Steve Jobs is not doing the Macworld 2009 keynote is his health. Apple PR muscle tried to mislead the public again saying that the reason was the irrelevance of Macworld. They said they didn't want to give importance to a show that Apple was pulling from.
That's a lie.
Again, I've not been able to find a single claim -- made by either Apple PR or by Steve Jobs -- which would seem to provide an explanation for why Schiller is delivering this year's keynote. Diaz is now rushing to cling to any aspect of his initial scoop that may, in some parallel universe, be accurate if the alleged claims proffered by Apple were ever actually made by Apple, but based on quotes that are readily available, the explanation given to Goldman had nothing at all (or, at best, very very little) to do with Macworld '09 and/or Jobs vs. Schiller and everything to do with the decision to leave after '09.
And, on that front, Diaz has no evidence upon which to base the conclusion that Apple's provided explanation regarding the diminishing importance of tradeshows is "a lie" and he certainly offers no evidence that Jobs -- or Jobs' health -- has anything at all to do with Macworld sans Apple after this year's event. Instead, Diaz wants to latch onto the only possible interpretation of existing claims by Apple which will allow him to come out of his initial report looking like anything other than a complete jackass.
Based on this new information, straight from the mouth of Steve Jobs, I once again contacted Diaz to elicit a response only to find that he continues to refuse to fully admit to having been wrong.
This time, Diaz responded, and I'm publishing that correspondence in full, starting with my first email:
On Jan 5, 2009, at 3:55 PM, Brian Ford wrote:
Looks like your source was wrong.
Does this mean you'll be posting a retraction, or are you just hoping people will forget that you based a bull@!$%# report on the word of an anonymous source?
On Jan 5, 2009, at 8:56 AM, Jesus Diaz wrote:
No, looks like our source was right and you didn't read our article.
j.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 4:28 PM, Brian Ford wrote:
Which part of...
"Steves health is rapidly declining. Apple is choosing to remove the hype factor strategically vs letting the hype destroy apple when the inevitable news comes later this spring.
This strategic loss will be less of a bang with investors. This is why Macworld is a no-go anymore. No more Steve means no more hype. Saying they are no longer needing [Macworld] is the cover designed by the worldwide "loyalty" department."
...is correct against...
"Jobs, 53 and a survivor of pancreatic cancer, said he will undergo a "relatively simple" treatment and will remain as head of Apple."
...given that you also continue to speculate that he's preparing to leave Apple, despite this speculation having now been officially contradicted?
How is his health "rapidly declining" in light of what has now been revealed? Seems as though his health is pretty much what everyone expected -- without needing a secret source or a deep throat -- not great, but not dire, either.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 9:47 AM, Jesus Diaz wrote:
Steve is not doing Macworld because of his health. Apple said he wasn't doing it because they didn't gave any importance to MW anymore. Lie.
Steve health may not be rapidly declining, as our source said. I've also said that in our latest article. But his precarious health is the reason why he couldn't do the keynote and decided to go on vacation instead.
BTW, check John Hopkins University figures on survival expectancy after the operation he went through. I hope Steve Jobs gets to live two more decades, but medicine and statistics are stubborn.
j.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 4:58 PM, Brian Ford wrote:
If your report had simply said: "Steve Jobs not keynoting with Macworld in 09 because of minor health issues..."
I'd not be contacting you.
Your article put Steve on his deathbed (Jobs specifically mentions articles like the one you posted) and the open letter *from* Jobs states outright that he has no intention of leaving Apple, and that he's staying on as CEO even through his recovery.
In short, you got the easy part right, the part no one would need a source to confirm, and got basically every important detail wrong. You're now saying "precarious" health. There's a big difference between saying that and what your source initially claimed. You said "may be worse than we can imagined" despite the fact that this news certainly isn't worse than what you -- or any other doomsayers -- imagined or reported. Staying with Apple vs. "preparing his departure" is also a big difference. The reason why he's not keynoting the '09 Macworld vs. why Apple has pulled out *for good* aren't the same thing either, and there's no indication that his "precarious health" at the beginning of '09 has anything at all to do with their reasons for leaving Macworld, though your source claims that his dire health and his decision to leave Apple explain that away. Yet, again, he claims he's *not* leaving Apple.
So, I'm still not sure what you correctly predicted?
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:11 AM, Jesus Diaz wrote:
Minor health issues?
Have you read what he wrote?
Check http://www.pancreatica.org/faq.html
"The survival of patients who received the Whipple procedure in one study (from a very experienced Johns Hopkins team) were reported out in 1995 as a 21% five-year survival rate, with a median survival of 15.5 months."
I'm sorry to burst your bubble.
The fact remains the same: he skipped MW. Apple lied. It was because of his health. Our source was wrong about "health rapidly declining" now. But it was before, and their doctors didn't know.
j.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 5:27 PM, Brian Ford wrote:
Yes, I've read the press release over and over again, trying to find something between the lines other than what is fairly plain to see: He's written this open letter to contrast the reality of his personal health with the sort of FUD that was posted in articles like the one you authored. As it turns out, the reality of his health -- not to mention all the other speculation you've not gotten right -- isn't at all similar to the fantasy your source provided, or the speculation you've published based on that source.
For what it's worth, the initial Apple press release didn't say anything about why he wasn't doing this year's Macworld. It only addressed the reasoning for bailing on all future events:
http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2008/12/16macworld.html
Perhaps you can point me to the sentence of that press release which backs up your assertion that Apple put forth an excuse -- of any kind -- for his decision to not appear this year, which would warrant an accusation of lying. You certainly don't have evidence that his health, or the possibility that he may someday leave Apple has anything at all to do with the Macworld exit after '09.
Everything in that press release appears to explain away the decision to back out after this year, but he never makes a single claim about why he's not appearing this year.
The fact is, he's going to retire eventually. It may even be because of his health. With that said, you can't make the same claim year after year and then pretend to have been right all along when he inevitably retires.
On Jan 5, 2009, at 10:35 AM, Jesus Diaz wrote:
Read the article i wrote today again, carefully. Apple has gone on the record with the reasons. Get your facts straight. Your fanboyism is clouding your judgement.
j.
My lastest response, to which I've yet to receive a reply:
Fanboyism has nothing to do with it, though I understand why someone who is now the author of an inaccurate scoop would fall back on that defense. Apple never gave a reason for why Jobs wasn't headlining Macworld in '09. In the press release, and in their response to Jim Goldman, they gave an explanation for why they wouldn't be participating in Macworld after 2009, reasons which haven't been proven false or even misleading. You've no reason to believe that the decision to pull out after this year is tied to Jobs or to his health.
I ask again: Where has Apple made a specific claim about why Jobs isn't delivering the '09 keynote? The only claim Apple PR has made is that his health isn't affecting his ability to do his job as CEO, and that's what they told Goldman. As it turns out, he's still performing his duties as CEO, despite a health issue.
Thus, there's no lie.
It's fair to say we're at the "not going to agree" point of the debate, and very little will be served by adding future correspondence, though if anything of value is transmitted, I'll update accordingly.
It's important to note, as I mention to Diaz in one of my responses, that there's no question that Jobs will someday retire as CEO of Apple. When that day comes, it may even be because his health isn't quite what it needs to be to fulfill his duties. Still, despite what Diaz continues to assert, there's no evidence and no reason to believe that said day is going to be "in the spring" or that Macworld without Apple is the result of Apple without Steve.
And, given that the speculation beyond what has now undeniably been proven to be false is simple guesswork as to when the inevitable will happen, and given that Diaz has been pushing said speculation for months, now, it's not going to be that impressive once he finally gets it right.
Most importantly, even if one were to humor the hypothetical assumption that Apple did indeed lie about why Jobs isn't appearing at Macworld, the idea (put forth by Diaz in his newest article) that this aspect of Diaz' initial scoop is equal to or as important as the part he got dead wrong -- the claim that Jobs' health is rapidly deteriorating and that the truth is much worse than imagined -- is a laughable attempt to save face and grasp at whatever shred of journalistic integrity he can maintain.
So, let's put these in order of importance, shall we? A little grade school lesson in reading comprehension:
- Steve jobs health is rapidly deteriorating and it's worse than we've imagined.
- This is the real reason Jobs is not presenting the '09 Keynote and why Apple is pulling out of Macworld after '09, once Jobs bows out, this spring.
Assuming you're wrong on the first bullet point (let's not kid ourselves, that was the major scoop) you don't get to retroactively gloat about the second bullet point when you've no hard evidence to back up the claim unless you squint really hard and invent some lines to read between amongst actual sentences in Apple's press releases.
The fact is, what has been "imagined" about Jobs' health is, in many cases, FUD that he's going to drop dead in the very near future and to say that the truth is even worse than that, when it turns out he's going to undergo a "relatively simple" procedure to correct a hormone imbalance, isn't an acceptable way for any serious journalist to be proven wrong, and it should mean that a "previously reliable" source is suddenly no longer a source at all.
Sadly, instead of accepting this and offering a retraction and some sort of offer to be more diligent in the future, Diaz offers "yeah buts" based on vague voodoo journalism. Maybe he should seek a job with Apple PR? Based on his assertions about their conduct, he's highly qualified.
Though, if there's anything at all to be learned from all this, it's that one shouldn't put much weight behind assertions put forth by Jesus Diaz.
