Apple played favorites with iPad access

C'mon -- this is such a NON-story.

Imagine: Apple couldn't/didn't give an advance iPad to every media outlet on the planet.

Therefore: some got one, and some didn't. Wow.

Of COURSE it's based on their whims (i.e., determination of who's likely to give it the most positive spin, or whatever criteria they might care to use). It's NOT a democracy or meritocracy. What did you THINK?

This also really sounds like sour grapes ...
Plus, it won't win any brownie points for next time either, for sure :O



Sorry. Welcome to the world.

A pointless piece. As others have observed, Apple is targeting the iPad to a broader demographic than readers of tech blogs. The reviewers at the New York Times, the Washington Post and USA Today were all among those favored with early iPads. They reach more consumers than the top 50 tech blogs combined.

So the 300,000 buyers are all morons?

"we don't have a full picture of what access was offered and how" but, that won't stop the 2nd-guessing by reviewers will it?

Um, so how does your argument hold up if tech-savvy consumers aren't the target market? Might as well say the Corvette is a very flawed proposition, and soccer moms know it.

Apple focused on getting coverage in media that matches their target markets. Why waste time on tech-centric media that doesn't reach the audience they're after and where (as you note) the product will be trashed?

"Apple isn't just controlling access -- they're doing their best to control the entire media perception of the company."

Guys, you're journalists, let's not be so nauseatingly coy.

It's the god-given right of every person and organization on earth to control other's perception of them. No one else is going to represent you're interests but you.

WTF exactly do you think Marketing and PR departments DO anyway?

This issue is about the media's (that's you) shark-and-chum behavior around everything Apple does because its a guaranteed link monster.

Be professional and just write about the product when you get access to it, and stop crying about the other kids getting it first.

Time vs Newsweek is pretty obvious... you don't get a Time cover without agreeing to exclusivity.

Certainly Doctorow at BoingBoing is not pro Apple (he wrote one of the most disparaging commentaries) so the 'very pro Apple' argument goes out the window. More likely they chose the media that they think hits the right readership for the product: Let's face it Engadget is not spreading the word. Anyone reading Engadget has already seen plenty about the iPad.

"Apple isn't just controlling access -- they're doing their best to control the entire media perception of the company."

Oh GASP!

So just exactly HOW MANY people should they have given free access to before you decide to stop calling it "favoritism"? 100, 1000, 1million?

And you know what, there'd always be SOMEBODY who didn't get one and, you guessed it, calls "favoritism! Waa!"

Or do you honestly believe Apple should have just provided free iPads to absolutely everyone in the world?...

This is standard operating procedure for any MARKETING initiative.

And +1 to 'rick,' 'Thawley' and 'Sean'