I think Scott has hit the essence of the issue perfectly. Wired has no idea how Steve J donates in his private life.
It's true that there's a value in adding PR value to your donations -- I'm not going to fault Bill G for getting ink with his donations because that gets people thinking about helping with Africa themselves. But private giving is worthy of respect and I'm sure Jobs does give back -- certainly more than Mr Kahney.
And its also true that Jobs contributes far more in his day job than Gates by bringing excellence into the computer universe.
The thing that's bothersome about the Wired article is that its showing a trend -- edgy, hip journalists making the choice to get personal and even attack someone because that person is a cultural icon. It's like a literary version of a paparazzi. Pick the right target and your article gets way more traction.
What gives a journalist the right to judge another person's approach to charity -- especially since Kahney has no idea what Jobs does privately. It's totally bogus.
These kinds of lame attacks are especially bad for the Web. To me the standard should always be, would I say this to someone I know in real life. I hope Mr Kahney would tone things down a bit if he knew Steve Jobs personally.
Personal attack pieces, grossly one-sided articles, name calling blogs, email flames -- it cheapens the Internet and makes people think they don't need to take responsibility for their own actions. So a thoughtful piece like this one is a nice relief.
by Tim — Jan 25
It's true that there's a value in adding PR value to your donations -- I'm not going to fault Bill G for getting ink with his donations because that gets people thinking about helping with Africa themselves. But private giving is worthy of respect and I'm sure Jobs does give back -- certainly more than Mr Kahney.
And its also true that Jobs contributes far more in his day job than Gates by bringing excellence into the computer universe.
The thing that's bothersome about the Wired article is that its showing a trend -- edgy, hip journalists making the choice to get personal and even attack someone because that person is a cultural icon. It's like a literary version of a paparazzi. Pick the right target and your article gets way more traction.
What gives a journalist the right to judge another person's approach to charity -- especially since Kahney has no idea what Jobs does privately. It's totally bogus.
These kinds of lame attacks are especially bad for the Web. To me the standard should always be, would I say this to someone I know in real life. I hope Mr Kahney would tone things down a bit if he knew Steve Jobs personally.
Personal attack pieces, grossly one-sided articles, name calling blogs, email flames -- it cheapens the Internet and makes people think they don't need to take responsibility for their own actions. So a thoughtful piece like this one is a nice relief.