Never mind the Gizmodo report was flimsy at best. Never mind the blog seemed to distance itself from its own report. Traders and their hair triggers swiftly yelled "Sell!" — and rumor overshadowed reason once again. I spoke to Apple after these headlines crossed and the company, which officially doesn't comment on rumors, reiterated the reasons it offered two weeks ago: Apple was pulling out of Macworld because the company didn't see the need to continue its investment in the expo, which included Steve Jobs' keynote. I was told this morning (Tuesday) that nothing has changed since then. The same reasons apply today that applied two weeks ago. - MG Siegler from Bookmarklet

Jack Skellington wants his costume back. - Derrick

If he's beta testing the new iDiet, I can tell you this: it's broke. - Akiva Moskovitz

but gizmodo walks away with 100,000 pageviews for it - did one reader stop reading ? nope. - Allen Stern

The tech blogosphere is so PR-whipped, they won't know if he's really sick until a memorial statue is erected in his honor. And, even then, a Twitter slap fight will break out about whether he's really dead or just keeping a (very) low profile. - Sprague D

everyone wants the pageviews - Allen Stern

Jobs as modern business version of Jim Morrison? - Valeria Maltoni

Who to believe in? - Gadiel Rivera

Valeria, I guess that means one day he could be the modern-day version of Elvis or Tupac or Kurt Cobain.... "Steve Jobs is in my basement, building an amazing new iPhone" - Eric Eldon

Liked for Allen's insightful comments. - MVB (Grinch of FF)

Eric - it will be really interesting to see what happens. Seems to have that kind of charisma. - Valeria Maltoni

As somebody whose husband died of cancer, he does look like he's seriously ill. - Dawn

Dawn I was just looking at pictures of my dad from his last Christmas and was thinking exactly the same thing. - MVB (Grinch of FF)

Anyone else remember the 1980s with dying soviet leaders. Is apple the kremlin of the techworld minus the secret police and gulags? Secrecy and information control can get out of hand. - Claes Krantz

So, Claes, you're saying that you think Apple does not have secret police and gulags? - MVB (Grinch of FF)

one anonymously-sourced blog post and AAPL loses $4 billion in market cap? somehow i don't think it's about pageviews. - Karim

when Engadget did the same in 2007, CNet interviewed Brian Lam of Gizmodo, who said that "the important thing on the juicy stories is to be extremely cautious, especially with Apple." riiiiiiight. http://news.cnet.com/Welcome... - Karim

I expect that any morning I will hear on the radio that Steve Jobs is dead. - Santa CW™

Their SEC filing lists availability of "key personnel", including Jobs, as a risk factor -- wouldn't it be due diligence for them to have an estimate of his loss baked into their financial projections? Especially when the brand is so identified with him. Or are they really at the mercy of rumors? - Sprague D

Yuck. I find the whole death watch thing revolting. - Hayes Haugen

Where are his sources? If he is so certain that he is correct, how come he's not quoting Apple's PR department? (Kattie Cotton, to be exact) - Mona Nomura

If Gizmodo's report on Steve Job's declining health seemed "flimsy" (http://tinyurl.com/7gwc9k), Jim Goldman's post seems equally "flimsy". - James Hoang

I just re-read the thread and Allen? Giz already gets 8923749283749283 gajillion page views, daily. I don't think that's the case. @Hayes: This is more than a death watch. Did you actually read the article on Giz? @James: A-MEN. FINALLY someone with PERSPECTIVE - Mona Nomura

James, are you equating a report from journalist who has won several national journalism awards, who has worked for ABC, CNN, and NBC, who talked to a source at Apple -- with a blog post sourced from an anonymous tipster whose motives are unknown, and whose editor is a self-confessed rumor whore? Facts aside, are you claiming both sources are equally *credible?* - Karim

Karim? After this award winning journalist published the post basically damning Giz, bloggers, and yelling at us "I KNOW BEST AND YOU DON'T" http://www.cnbc.com/id... he then writes a piece stating: "It's a classic case of "no news is good news." Stop the rumors. And stop believing them. Until Apple says something different, or I get my hands on something tangible and trustworthy, I'm taking the company at its word. All the rest is noise and manipulation." http://www.cnbc.com/id... - um, a little hypocritical? I don't care how many awards he has, that is irresponsible. - Mona Nomura

And in his first piece, there were NO quotes. If he's an award winning journalist then where are the facts? Where are the quotes? Why should I believe him? And WHY do I need to think about these things when turning to 'credible' sources? So where does that leave us (the readers)? - Mona Nomura

Ok, sorry, you lost me :-D How is suggesting that people report *news* and not unsubstantiated *rumors* irresponsible? EDIT: or hypocritical, for that matter? - Karim

He is not reporting news either and contributing to the noise... - Mona Nomura

I personally just found a guy who majored in journalism -- where presumably they teach you stuff like journalistic ethics, how to source a story, fact checking, etc. -- and who has won awards for journalism, who has been in tech journalism since 1989, who has worked for several national news organizations, etc. ad nauseam, to be a *slightly* more credible witness than just some random guy on a blog. Am I too trusting? :-D - Karim

Gizmodo had their one anonymous source. Goldman says he called Apple. Did he quote anyone at Apple? No. Again, I'm assuming that when a respected tech journalist says he called a tech company, he actually called them. I'm also assuming that a quote wouldn't have been useful in this case, since it is Apple's policy *not to comment on rumors.* All they did (according to Goldman) was repeat the previously-given reasons for pulling out of Macworld, and state that nothing had changed. - Karim

Trust me, I want to believe that guy too. But he was wrong about the Macbook Air, iPhone, http://www.appleinsider.com/article... and the Zune phonehttp://www.google.com/search... (project pink). :( http://www.google.com/search... don't want to argue about who is right or who is wrong. I just want to know what to believe, who to believe, and can we still continue believing? Why do I have to fact check my news sources? - Mona Nomura

In addition, Goldman says he talked to anonymous sources inside Apple, and they told him nothing had changed. So (assuming he isn't making shit up) he is at least trying to corroborate what he's been told from MULTIPLE SOURCES. This also makes him more credible than Gizmodo and their one random guy. I'm guessing they teach that in Journalism 101. - Karim

Ghouls and grave robbers hovering like vultures, Karma will find you. - Phil Boiarski

If Goldman is lying, he is destroying his career, his reputation at pretty much every major media outlet in the country. Whereas Gizmodo's editor -- a self-confessed rumor whore -- is probably just going to say "oops, our source mislead us" and go back to blogging. Or better yet, they'll wait until Jobs actually dies and then run a "told you so" post. - Karim

So even if Goldman was wrong he gets away with creating, spreading rumors because of his awards? And he's not a hypocrite for calling out bloggers for doing the same thing? - Mona Nomura

You'd expect Apple to act in their own best interest and downplay whatever health issues Jobs might have. I expect Goldman to be honest because, as a "real" journalist concerned with ethics, he's not allowed to buy shares of Apple. That leaves the question of Gizmodo's anonymous source and whether they stand to benefit financially from tanking shares of Apple. Doubt you'll be reading about *that* in their blog. - Karim

Mona, going back to reply to comments -- it *is* news to say that the reason why a major tech stock got hammered today was an unsubstantiated rumor. it is also news to report on the efforts you made to confirm or deny the rumor. - Karim

Gawker's policies prohibits employees from trading stocks, taking trips on companies, invitations to events. Can you say the same for Goldman? Look, I don't work at Gawker, nor do I work for Gizmodo. But just because this guy has this award, that award, it doesn't mean anything to me. I look at the facts, assess the situation. I don't understand why this guy thinks he's better than the next when he's doing the same exact thing. - Mona Nomura

Mona I'm starting to wonder if we're looking at the same story. lol What rumors were spread by Goldman? I was simply saying that the stakes are higher if Goldman is wrong than if Gizmodo is wrong. If Goldman is wrong, either he is lying and his career is over, or someone at Apple is lying and the lawsuits begin. If Gizmodo is wrong, they'll just go "oops." It's just a blog, right? ;-) - Karim

That's thing that frustrates me!! Goldman has been wrong with the Macbook Air, the iPhone release and most recently the Zune phone and he's still a credible source? Wrong is wrong! And with the increase of digital media, it highly concerns me because I no longer know who or what to trust.... All I want is fact checking and not headline chasing and it seems like I'm asking for too much haha - Mona Nomura

lol Mona, in the 2nd Goldman story you linked to, he says flat out, he's not allowed to buy shares either. And I am not talking about Gawker/Gizmodo motivation here (though *that* can be questioned as well), but rather the motivation of the *anonymous tipster.* If Goldman calls up Apple, we *know* what Apple's motivation is -- to not comment, to downplay concerns. But this anonymous tipster at Gizmodo -- what's his motivation? Does he stand to gain financially? - Karim

But the same thing is said for the corporations - they're protecting themselves financially, too. LOL So is it now up to us (the readers) to be critical thinkers and not allow publications to manipulate us like this? What does this mean for people like me who's subscribed to a lot of these said "credible sources"? - Mona Nomura

I'm honestly ignorant of how Goldman was wrong with the Macbook Air, iPhone etc. but honestly I have more respect for him picking up the phone and calling Apple, and getting confirmation from multiple sources, vs. Gizmodo's single tipster. Likewise Goldman managed to get Apple to say *something,* even if it was repeating what they had already said, vs. Gizmodo's "Apple did not comment on this story after being contacted." - Karim

lack of direct quotes aside, what Goldman did, by calling up Apple and attempting to confirm the rumor, fell into the category of fact-checking. What Gizmodo did, by reporting a rumor from a single source, fell into the category of rumor-mongering. I honestly can't see how the two are equal. - Karim

How do you know they relied on a single tipster Karim - because they didn't go into detail who and how many people they contacted? If this was the first time Giz leaked some Apple news w/ no history of being correct, I would not believe them. But they were right three out of the three times from one source, as opposed to Goldman's multiple sources that were incorrect. Not only that, he was most recently wrong about the Zune phone - a totally different company. How credible are his sources? - Mona Nomura

the article implies a single tipster. it refers to "a previously reliable source" (singular), "this source" (singular), "our Deep Throat" (singular). there's no reason to believe they had multiple sources. again, i know *nothing* about Goldman being "wrong" about the Zune phone -- I don't know whether the context was a prediction, a rumor, a statement of fact or what. feel free to pass along a link... - Karim

If you want to talk track record, last year, the *exact same* author at Gizmodo, Jesus Diaz, got pwned by some 16-year-old punk in his parents' basement. see http://www.smh.com.au/news... and http://www.stuff.co.nz/4154988.... how was Gizmodo convinced that they had a credible rumor source for Apple? The 16-year-old kid just signed his email with, "Tom Oliveri, Google Marketing Product Manager." That's all. - Karim

they ran a story about Apple products because their so-called source *claimed* to work for Google. Guess that made him unimpeachable. Gizmodo then ran a half-assed non-apology (http://gizmodo.com/286511...) that basically said, welp, we got duped, shit happens. - Karim