PDA

View Full Version : PC World editor-in-chief quits after senior vp kills Apple s...


MacBytes
May 4, 2007, 10:34 AM
http://www.macbytes.com/images/bytessig.gif (http://www.macbytes.com)

Category: News and Press Releases
Link: PC World editor-in-chief quits after senior vp kills Apple story (http://www.macbytes.com/link.php?sid=20070504113439)
Description:: Harry McCracken quit abruptly this week after IDG senior vice president Colin Crawford told him to kill a piece titled "Ten Things We Hate About Apple," reports Kim Zetter. Crawford was previously CEO of MacWorld and only started at PC World about a month ago. IDG owns both the PC World and MacWorld publications.

Posted on MacBytes.com (http://www.macbytes.com)
Approved by Mudbug

mattscott306
May 4, 2007, 10:38 AM
What no link to the article?

Mudbug
May 4, 2007, 10:39 AM
that irritated me as well - if you're going to quit over having something not get published, publish it anyway. :)

mattscott306
May 4, 2007, 10:42 AM
He has a blog... why not put it there?

BenRoethig
May 4, 2007, 11:09 AM
If a magazine is subject to censorship from computer companies, it loses its credibility. They should print the truth, good or bad, not what Steve and the other tech executives want to hear.

nagromme
May 4, 2007, 12:17 PM
We can't know everything behind the scenes, but on the surface I'm inclined to side with McCracken, not the magazine (who denies McCracken's assertions).

I don't think he left over an Apple article though--he left over more important issues, and this instance was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

Still, "PC World Editor Forced Out Due to Anti-Apple Stance" makes a better sound bite :)

Daring Fireball points out how questionable the story is--though I personally do find McCracken's claims at least plausible:

http://daringfireball.net/2007/05/mccracken_pc_world

Also note that Paul Thurott apparently believes that all Apple-related MacWorld--and now PC World--articles are submitted to Apple for approval in secret, and that only Apple themselves could have decided that this "Hate Apple" story wasn't worth publishing :p Another in a long string of secret conspiracies by evil Apple, in Thurott's view.... or the view he pretends to hold :p

mrsebastian
May 4, 2007, 01:01 PM
They should print the truth, good or bad...

as long as money continues to drive us, there will never be real truth.

nagromme
May 4, 2007, 01:04 PM
as long as money continues to drive us, there will never be real truth.

No. And the truth will never stop being a worthy goal to get as close to as we can, and to fight for, and to quit over :)

solvs
May 5, 2007, 08:15 PM
Jason Snell, one of the big wigs at MacWorld, has disputed straight out the claims that anyone at Apple sees an article before it's published. If they criticize after, that's something else entirely. I wouldn't like it if they are bowing to advertisers, Apple and otherwise, which it something we heard a few weeks ago they were doing. But without seeing the article and hearing the reasons why it was canned straight from the source (even if it was obvious from the article), it's hard to know what to think.

Peace
May 5, 2007, 09:46 PM
Just the title of the unpublished article "Ten things we hate about Apple" implies an op-ed piece and anti-Apple.Perhaps IDG didn't want PC World to look like the whole PC World community hates Apple.
It also sounds like an ex Apple employee wanting to vent his displeasure for Apple.

I see nothing evil going on.

solvs
May 5, 2007, 11:50 PM
Just the title of the unpublished article "Ten things we hate about Apple" implies an op-ed piece and anti-Apple.Perhaps IDG didn't want PC World to look like the whole PC World community hates Apple.
It also sounds like an ex Apple employee wanting to vent his displeasure for Apple.
He claimed it was harmless ribbing. We've certainly seen such things before, some are actually kinda funny and hit on some good points. I've heard this was just part of a larger problem he had with upper management on such things, but also that the article wasn't very good. Maybe both sides are somewhat justified, but somewhat in the wrong as well.

smueboy
May 6, 2007, 11:13 AM
We can't know everything behind the scenes, but on the surface I'm inclined to side with McCracken, not the magazine (who denies McCracken's assertions).

I don't think he left over an Apple article though--he left over more important issues, and this instance was just the straw that broke the camel's back.

I agree on both accounts. It does stink if Crawford is pandering to Apple and other vendors. The updated Wired blog (http://blog.wired.com/business/2007/05/new_info_on_pc_.html) suggests that the piece was to be followed by a '10 things we love about Apple' piece and similar love/hate pieces for Microsoft, so i fail to see any reason to kill it.

Max Payne
May 6, 2007, 07:27 PM
Killing the story doesn't make sense. :confused: They guy resigning for such a thing doesn't make sense.

snowmoon
May 7, 2007, 09:01 AM
This blog seems to have a much more sane view...

http://www.roughlydrafted.com/RD/RDM.Tech.Q2.07/7CDAFFA9-6D18-40C4-A903-4BDED5AEFF84.html

mkrishnan
May 7, 2007, 07:51 PM
The lists appear to have been published by PC World anyway (see roland.g's thread (http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=302799)).

solvs
May 8, 2007, 02:29 AM
Well, it wasn't that bad, but it wasn't that good either.

Peace
May 9, 2007, 07:12 PM
He's back and the CEO has been reassigned.

http://news.com.com/8301-10784_3-9717724-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20