This post was published 1 year 4 months 23 days ago which may make its actuality or expire date not be valid anymore. This site is not responsible for any misunderstanding.

One accepts a certain amount of bias in journalism, especially areas that depend so heavily on the opinion and viewpoint of the journalist. Consider it an occupational hazard…reviewers have favorites, pundits have blind spots, analysts have pre-conceived ideas…it’s just human nature after all.

Normally I don’t really allow the persistent and kneejerk Anti-Microsoft/Pro-Apple bias that exists in almost all tech journalism to bother me overly much. When I note that even the mainstream press feels the need to note his negative reaction to MobileMe was the first Apple product that Walt Mossberg at the Times has panned since 1999, I roll my eyes. When it is reported that  high profile reporters who favor Apple get preferential treatment in Cupertino and face time with Steve Jobs while any one who writes things Steve doesn’t like get ignored, I chuckle at the way the stories are tilted to make it seem like Jobs is just being endearingly puckish, like a 5th grader writing his best friends list. When endless tech forums fill up with blind adoration for any Apple product (“OMG, look at how WHITE the new earbuds ARE…WTFBBQ they are bootiful!!!”) and automatic hatred for anything produced by Microsoft (sorry, I mean Micro$oft) I shrug. I even laugh out loud as I watch the Apple fanboys turn their ire on Google over the Android phone, because, well, it isn’t made by Apple.

However, even I have my limits…even I can be pushed too far by the bias and poor reporting over the new iPod releases.

There is always a firestorm of Apple fanboy excitement connected to Apple product announcements. To give the devil his due, Steve Jobs may be the finest tech marketer of all time. No one can rally the faithful, attract the curious and charm the press the way that he can. Other companies with products to announce usually either stay as far away from Apple’s release dates as possible, or buck the odds by trying to borrow some of Apple’s thunder.

Microsoft choosing to announce new Zunes so close to new iPods was certainly a risk…either nervy or stupid depending on your point of view. Of course, true Apple fanboys (and many reporters) said it wouldn’t matter when pitiful Zunes are announced in the face of Apple’s dominating 75 percent of the MP3 market (note, Apple’s 75 percent share of MP3s is “glorious and unassailable”, Microsoft’s 75 percent share of the web browser market is “fading fast and probably illegal”).

Most all news stories about the new Zune models and software led off with talking about how great the iPods were. Sometimes Zunes were barely mentioned except for the title and a snarky comment or two, despite the fact that they were the topic of the article. It all was getting to be a bit much as the week rolled along. Even when a tech site like Gizmodo acknowledged that in some areas (such as WiFi and intelligent playlist generation) the Zunes were superior, they included enough snark in the story (and of course in the tidal wave of “So f&3kin what??? iPods rox 111oneoneone!!!” comments) that the praise was turned into another story about the iPods.

Then today at lunch I read the story that finally went over the line.

In a tiny little news brief on CNet News entitled Microsoft Zune Updates, Kara Tsuboi wrote the following (I have bolded the key point for easy reading):

At last week’s Apple event, CEO Steve Jobs informed the crowd that Apple holds roughly 73 percent of the MP3 market share. According to his numbers, Microsoft has a hold on a little more than 2 percent of the market. Given the ubiquity of the iPod versus the Zune, it’s not hard to believe those figures, even if it’s give or take a few percentage points.

On Tuesday, Microsoft released a new round of upgrades for its Zune, in hopes of making the gadget more competitive with the Apple offerings, and perhaps eating into that market dominance. On the Daily Debrief, CNET News senior writer Ina Fried shows off one of the new Zune versions, which looks–and is priced–suspiciously like Apple’s iPod Nano.

The biggest difference between the two is the Zune’s ability to connect to a handful of services via Wi-Fi. Ina explains some of the reasons why you’d want this capability on your MP3 player, but the question is, is this enough of an edge for Microsoft to increase its presence in the market?

Alright, ignore the fact she spends most of a story about the Zune talking iPods, that is so typical, as is the dismissive tone…but she clearly implies that the Zune’s ripped off the form factor of the new Nanos!!!

Actually, it was the other way around, in fact all of the rumor sites commented endlessly and sarcastically that the longer Nano form factor looked Zune like. Now the new Nano look is out for a week and the Zune design which has stayed pretty consistent since the Zune 1 was launched, is mimicking the iPods that have been out a few days?

Is this just a woefully uninformed CNet intern churning out her required 10 posts a day who didn’t bother to check her sources, or a seasoned reporter who assumes that any hyperbole that is pro Apple and anti Microsoft will fly these days?

Does the endless bias drive anyone else slowly off their nut? Is it too much to ask for a little even-handedness in the tech press? Aren’t “News” and “Opinion” supposed to be handled differently? Have an opinion? Chime in now. Share the rant, I always say.