All hail Henry Blodget's must-read Silicon Alley Insider for posting this incredible video from CNBC last night. And boy does CNBC look bad: Not only was CNBC reporter Jim Goldman lied to by sources at Apple and yet he doesn't seem to mind, but his colleague at CNBC, Dennis Kneale, dismissed one of the fundamental tenets of journalism, which is that you check every fact.
Here's the set-up: Dan Lyons, the cheeky Newsweek reporter who once published the "Fake Steve Jobs" blog, was on CNBC to talk about the declining health of the real Steve Jobs. Lyons was on with several others, including CNBC-er Goldman, who had stoogishly been reporting that Jobs was fine; indeed, Goldman in the past had gone so far as to attack a report in Gizmodo that Jobs' health was in "declining rapidly."
In other words, Goldman got the story totally wrong. And yet in the segment last night, Goldman didn't seem to mind, refusing to criticize the Apple source that had so obviously misled him. Goldman reminded me of famously Ziegleresque televised chumps of the past, such as Lanny Davis, who was happy to be lied to by Bill Clinton, and Scott McClellan, who was happy to repeat pro-George W. Bush talking points, and then equally happy to repeat anti-Bush talking points.
Now why would Goldman be so nice about being lied to? Two possibilities come to mind: First, he is a true Apple Kool-aid drinker, along the lines of those Scientologists who await the return of L. Ron Hubbard. Or second, Goldman actually knows better than what he is spouting, but figures that preserving his friendly relationship with his "source" inside Apple--most likely, an Apple p.r. person--is more important than delivering the straight scoop to his viewers on the CNBC channel.*
Well, that was too much for Lyons. And here I will met CNET's Caroline McCarthy pick up the tale:
"You can try to backpedal and say that what you reported was true," Lyons said to Goldman on CNBC, adding that the broadcast journalist had been "played" and "punked" by his sources at Apple, "but look, you should apologize to Gizmodo for having criticized them and apologize to your viewers for having gotten it so wrong."
He also took a direct dig at the credibility of CNBC, asking, "Why have a bureau out in Silicon Valley?"
SAI, CNET and others are reporting that Lyons has been "banned for life" from CNBC. And I am sure that's true, given the insular and cozy world of CNBC, where reporters fall in love with their beats, and the people that they meet--right, Maria Bartiromo?
And so it would be forlorn for me to suggest that CNBC really needs to bring in Lyons, and to teach their reporters how to be something other than flacks for their industries.
The first CNBC-er who needs to be in line for such instruction is Kneale, who attempted to defend Goldman during yesterday's segment, saying to Lyons, "You have to believe most of what you are told. You can't check everything." Of course, Kneale's claim is the opposite of what any first-year J student is told, which is, "If your own mother tells you something, double check it." And if it's a slippery corporate p.r. type telling it to you, then absolutely, check every last thing.
Before you make a fool of yourself on TV and bring discredit to your network.
It will be interesting to see if there is any further fallout from this story, other than the exiling of Lyons, the one truth-teller.
*In case anyone is wondering, I am typing this blog posting on a Mac--I am a huge fan of the company, and am personally devastated by the thought of a Jobs-less Apple, to say nothing of a Jobs-less world. Steven has made the world an infinitely better place, and he has done so over the opposition of many others. And yet if Jobs has great work to do, others have their work, too. Apple might like fawning coverage over every last thing about it, but journalists are supposed to be a check-and-balance, not a stenographer to power.
