The Daily Show is the best news program on TV bar none, and so when Jon Stewart gives his thoughts on the ongoing iPhone 4 saga and name-checks Gizmodo, I simply have to share it with you guys.
I’m not going to comment on it – I think Jon voices his opinion pretty well without me adding anything. [The Daily Show]
Pinball
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 4:21 PMJon Stewart is hilarious and his take on the whole situation is hilarious, and yeah he is probably right that Apple maybe needs to chill a bit; however, it doesn’t change the fact Gizmodo:
1) Bought something off person that didn’t have any right to sell it
2) Knew they were buying something off a person who didn’t have a right to sell it
3) Publicly embarrassed the poor guy that lost it, and then tried to defend doing so, and
4) Got on their high horse when Apple asked for their product (which by way they own) back.
Nikhil
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 6:29 PMWell said.
Jubbin Grewal
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 6:59 PMLol, this way funny. Go John!
Matt
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 7:08 PMHahahahahahaha Nerdlington J. Techsupport
Luke
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 8:40 PMClassic…
steve
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 10:11 PMappholes… gold
Bernie
Thursday, April 29, 2010 at 11:17 PMThis is BS.
Gizmode bought a phone for $5000 that they knew is hot. If it wasn’t hot, it wouldn’t cost that much. Gizmodo knew it was the prototype, they knew the seller wasn’t the owner. No one would fork over that much unless it was checked out first. So handling stolen goods is the crime. The Police should be investigating.
You played with it for over a week…. so, not much intention of returning it; and then you pulled it apart so all competeters could look over the challange that was in front of them… Any industrial espionage charges there???
Then you go an do the jerk thing of plastering the engineers name and face all over the web. That’s the last straw, that’s just dirty and trashy. I don’t thing Gizmodo can claim any moral or higher ground.
Apple has reported it as stolen, the Police are obliged to investigate and it can’t be stopped now, no matter how much you cry.
Oh yes, how about that finder? Claims he tried to contact Apple to return the phone; he contacted the support desk…… If I leave my car in a parking lot, and someone takes it home because I wasn’t with it, that’s stealing. Same thing here. If that person genuinely wanted to return it, I’d expect them to call me (especially if my details were on facebook on display, which is how we know the engineers name). I don’t expect the finder to call Ford support (the maker of the car) or my Employer, they’re supposed to call ME. So why did this finder call Apple support and not the engineer? Because the KNEW. They knew is wasn’t the engineers phone, they knew it was Apples and it was special. Hence the price. Dirty, dirty, dirty.
Stop the BS about being victimised and innocent.
By the way, the shield law protects a journalist from identifying sources, it doesn’t protect you from committing crime.
Heath
Friday, April 30, 2010 at 8:43 AMWow, where’s the love guys? If you don’t like Gizmodo leaking new gadgets (legally or illegally) then maybe stop coming here and commenting. I appreciate what Gizmodo has done, screw Apple. Who cares if the product was ‘hot’? We’ve all bought something at one time or another that wasn’t from a legitimate source, with or without knowledge of the fact, so get off their backs and stop trolling and hating.
Peter Simpson
Friday, April 30, 2010 at 10:17 AMThis. Seriously, if you’ve downloaded one image from Flickr, or have one copied movie in your possession, you’re no better than Gizmodo as far as ownership goes, glass houses and all that guff. Fortunately, I liked Gizmodo’s coverage and it was awesome seeing them stick it to The Man. Man, when did apple become The Man?
Bernie
Friday, April 30, 2010 at 10:40 AMActually, I’ve always liked Gizmodo, and believe in a little give and take, and appreciated the info on the phone, but they went tooo far when they trashed and outed the engineer. Was that needed? Was that good tech journalism? No that was trash and that’s what has tipped me over.
Why was it necessary to knock and humiliate him publically? Shouldn’t both sides of the story be obtained first? Who claimed he was drunk? Who claimed he left the premises and the iPhone on the barstool? Gizmodo stated this as fact coming from another party, the finder/thief. We don’t know the truth at the moment, it might have happened like that, but if he’s a thief, he’ll definately tell the story so he sounds clean. Which means it’s not the truth as all thieves lie. And he is a thief; the minute he decides to sell it for big $$$ …. theft (financial advantage by deception). And deception is the operative word here.
Don’t judge a person until you KNOW both sides of the story, and certainly don’t trash them in public. He’s personal and public life is probably hell at the moment, not to mention his ability to hold a job. Would you like that to happen to you?
Come on … some perspective here. This is not a reality TV show, it’s not a novel or magazine, this is someones actual life that got trashed. And that’s a crime in its own right.
jeremy kelaher
Friday, April 30, 2010 at 8:15 PMfunny! Still, felony is felony. Your editor is SO sending a night in the cells at some point soon:-) Was is worth it? For us, yes. For your CPM, probably. For Mr Editor? possibly not. For the poor shmuck who lost the phone, who you outed for all our entertainment? Nup. For that alone, one of you guys should take it up the @%$#.