Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Steve Jobs, Apple, Blogs
The future of Fake Steve
Man, I head out for a few days (I've been away at BlizzCon, reporting for our online gaming cousin WoW Insider), and Fake Steve got burnt. Not by us, of course-- we made a promise to not care about the identity of Fake Steve, and we still don't. But we're not the only site on the Internet, and the real Fake Steve is out there. So the question then becomes: now what?FSJ himself claims it's not over, though he is taking a short break. Forbes is going to sponsor the blog, although it's not clear what "sponsoring" means in that context. All we care about is that we still get Fake Steve-- the wacky ramblings and sparkling insights of Steve Jobs. Is that what we'll get? As Gruber points out, it's probably not. FSJ's last post is not in the voice of Steve Jobs; it's in the voice of someone pretending to be him. The curtain is falling already.
There's an interesting parallel to this, and it's newsworthy, too: Bree, as of last Friday, is dead. Lonelygirl15, the young woman who took over YouTube and then was discovered to be the product of an imagination, was killed in the final online episode of her story. When Lonelygirl15 was outed, I was just as intrigued as I was with the mystery of FSJ-- who is she and what is this really all about? But when the mystery was revealed, I grew bored with it, and a look at the last Lonelygirl video tells me that I didn't miss much-- the stuff that attracted me in the first place (an interesting form, a simple, mysterious conceit) has long since been abandoned for a huge, boring cast and a formulaic plot (a group called "The Order" features prominently). Once Lonelygirl admitted she was fake, she became so.
So the worry with Fake Steve is that the same thing will happen. Gruber thinks we're in denial, but we're not-- when a newspaper editor told Virginia there was a Santa Claus, was he denying the truth? We want Fake Steve-- a witty, insightful blog from a Steve Jobs who pretends that he's real, sounds like he's real, and therefore is real. We just worry that now that the bubble's broken, Fake Steve won't stick to his guns and stay real.
![TUAW [Cafepress]](http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.tuaw.com/media/tuaw-cafepress-promo.png)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Bob said 12:12PM on 8-07-2007
FSJ is dead. Long live the real Steve Jobs.
Reply
Michael said 10:16AM on 8-07-2007
"The future of Fake Steve"?
Bleak. Roughly Drafted has already posted an attack on him:
http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q3.07/61BE28FC-FCFF-4997-9CCC-B3E215B3D153.html
Seriously? Wait and see. He's a clever and witty writer. As for the RDM attack, I don't know; I'll bear it in mind ... I'm still not sure whether Paul Thurrott is as wicked as Dan says or not and now we have another villain already. Maybe yes, maybe no.
Reply
IF Webmaster said 10:18AM on 8-07-2007
I love Gruber and Daring Fireball, but I think he's wrong on this one. The author of the blog can no longer take pot shots the way he was able to when his identity was safe. Imagine a write for Forbes calling Gates a certain piece of the human anatomy for a laugh. This won't be possible anymore because anyone who's anyone in the industry can simply pick up the phone and call the author up and give him the what-what.
People love a mystery, which is one of the reasons why FSJ was so appealing. Although his writing is indeed witty, insightful and funny, it was our collective denial in regards to his identity that made it all so appealing. This is lost and I suspect the blog will lose popularity quickly.
Gedeon
Reply
Matteo said 10:48AM on 8-07-2007
The irony (don't know if I spelled it correctly, sorry) is that the ones who "unmasked" FSJ will also have a very short lived glory. For a minute of popularity they spoiled one of the most fascinating blogs on the internet. Personally I liked FSJ's blog because it spoke openly, often with strong opinions on matters. TUAW has always been my primary source of Apple information, but I liked to read the "fake insights of FSJ". Now this is all over, as someone stated, because the protection given by anonimity is no longer there. FSJ, in my opinion, never really abused of it, but he used it cunningly and expressed some interesting views.
Reply
Jay said 12:48PM on 8-07-2007
Yeah I think Gruber's wrong too this time since it's not really the same as an actor playing a role. It's FSJ's anonymity that gave him the edge. Now that he's been unmasked he won't have that, especially given that he's employed by Forbes. He'll be toned down and with that goes his unique "charm".
Reply
buzweaver said 12:25PM on 8-07-2007
And the most significant element to this whole fake Steve Jobs thing is that its not important.
Reply
BJ Nemeth said 6:33PM on 8-07-2007
I agree with several of the other commenters. Fake Steve Jobs drew power from his anonymity, and it gave him freedom to take shots at heavyweights within the industry. If they can just turn around and call his editor ... that changes the entire dynamic.
I also applaud TUAW's decision to not report FSJ's real name. It's a subtle thing, but it's the difference between talking about Indiana Jones and Harrison Ford. They're different "people." I prefer Indiana Jones, and I prefer Fake Steve Jobs. (Yes, the truth is out there for anyone with Google and 30 seconds, but that doesn't mean TUAW needs to report it here.)
I think Gruber was right about one thing. When he wrote a sample of what FSJ *could* have written about being unmasked (in charactr, of course), it was brilliant. I wish Fake Steve Jobs had stayed in character when talking about the NY Times story. Yes, many of us would have "known" the truth, but it would have given us a fun sense of plausible deniability. Now that's he's admitted it on his own blog ... the curtain has been irrevocably pulled back on the Wizard of Oz.
Reply
Jon H. said 10:08PM on 8-07-2007
Yeah, I can hardly see them *not* pulling a lonelygirl with this one...
I agree with #2: "Imagine a write[r] for Forbes calling Gates a certain piece of the human anatomy for a laugh. This won't be possible anymore"
Maybe it would be better if he wasn't aligned with Forbes... But now that he's out, will he post on so-called company time, or continue to remain independent?
Reply