Court releases e-mail from Gizmodo editor about now-famous $5,000 iPhone
In the latest episode of Apple vs. Gizmodo we learn that Gizmodo editorial director Brian Lam sent Steve Jobs an e-mail in response to the latter’s phone call seeking return of a wayward iPhone prototype that the gadget site had bought for $5,000.
What I found particularly interesting was the introductory line of Lam’s e-mail, which reads: “Hey Steve, this email chain is off the record on my side.”
(2010’s 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries)
Having been a journalist for 30-plus years, I understand “off the record” – yet I am not exactly clear on what Lam is trying to communicate to Jobs here. The most likely reading is that Lam is assuring Jobs that he, Lam, will not publish the contents of their exchange. However, there is another – albeit less likely – interpretation. Both are laughable.
Translation 1:
“Hey, Steve, we’ve paid $5,000 for a prototype of your next-gen iPhone that your guy lost and some kid lifted from a bar; we’re not willing to give it back – yet; we have every intention of exploiting this ill-gotten gain to the fullest; but really – honestly Steve – you can trust me when I say that I won’t publish anything you might have to say in this e-mail exchange.”
Trust me? How’s that for gall? I doubt Steve Jobs has ever been on a turnip truck, never mind fallen off one. … Apple’s reply came through its legal department.
Translation No. 2:
“Hey, Steve, we’ve paid $5,000 for a prototype of your next-gen iPhone that your guy lost and some kid lifted from a bar; we’re not willing to give it back – yet; we have every intention of exploiting this ill-gotten gain to the fullest. Nevertheless, I am sure that you will understand and honor my need to keep this exchange private – just between the two of us, Steve-a-rino – lest anyone get the silly notion that this is some kind of ransom note.”
As mentioned above, the second translation seems less likely – not because the e-mail doesn’t invite comparisons to a ransom note – but because Lam and his colleagues at Gizmodo are journalists (they insist; I agree) and any journalist knows that you can’t simply call “off the record” like an 8-year-old would call “I’ve got the front seat.” Real journalists know that any “off the record” request needs to be proffered by one party and agreed to by both before any information conveyed between the two is considered confidential.
So here’s the bottom line: Either Gizmodo believes Steve Jobs is a blithering idiot … or they’re not real journalists.
(Update: Fortune offers “10 juicy details from the iPhone affidavit.”)
(Update 2: As for the Good Samaritan who found the phone, here’s what he reportedly told friends who implored him to return it for the sake of the poor guy who lost it: “Sucks for him. He lost his phone. Shouldn’t have lost his phone.” Way to make your parents proud, pal.)
Welcome regulars and passersby. Here are a few more recent Buzzblog items. And, if you’d like to receive Buzzblog via e-mail newsletter, here’s where to sign up.
2010’s 25 Geekiest 25th Anniversaries.
How many zettabytes can dance on the had of a pin?
Dear Apple: Please make “magical” disappear from your iPad marketing.
How the ‘Net would have saved Coke from New Coke.
I have absolutely nothing to say about the iPad.
Google cracks animal translation riddle … for Android.
Clever video technique shows there really are two sides to any story.
Doing the Laptop Drive of Shame, Part III
True: This site is not Snopes.com
A new take on cloud security … from Hitler.
Facebook pushing ‘Suicide Machine’ into an open-source afterlife
Cell-phone gabber in fast-food line gets his just deserts
48 technology “firsts” that made a president’s day.
