Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 19th Jan 2009 15:25 UTC
Apple Speculation about Steve Jobs' health situation has been a hot topic for a while now, and Bloomberg is jumping on the bandwagon as well - but you have to wonder if there's a limit as to how far journalists should go in order to gain insight into Jobs' health. While his position as CEO of a large publicly traded company puts him on a pedestal, I do believe there are limits to the hight of this pedestal. Bloomberg grossly crossed the line in my book, and Jobs seems to agree with me. "Why don't you guys leave me alone?"
Thread beginning with comment 344360
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Wishful thinking
by robinh on Mon 19th Jan 2009 16:54 UTC
robinh
Member since:
2006-12-19

Agree that the poor guy should be left alone, but in today's world this is not going to happen.

I.M.O, we in the west spend too much time worrying about the *rights* and *freedoms* of the press, and not enough time worrying about their *responsibilities*.

Reply Score: 4

RE: Wishful thinking
by TechGeek on Mon 19th Jan 2009 17:04 in reply to "Wishful thinking"
TechGeek Member since:
2006-01-14

Responsibility? Lets talk about responsibility. How about the responsibility of the CEO of a publicly traded company to provide good leadership. How about the responsibility of the CEO to tell the truth and be honest about their ability and limitations. Jobs knew what being a CEO meant when he took the position. If he wanted privacy, he should have stepped down when he first got sick. Then he could have all the privacy in the world. I have much personal sympathy for anyone going through what he is going through. But lets be honest. Some things in life come with a cost. And the cost of being a famous CEO is lack of privacy when life turns to shit on you.

Reply Parent Score: 9

RE[2]: Wishful thinking
by akrosdbay on Mon 19th Jan 2009 18:41 in reply to "RE: Wishful thinking"
akrosdbay Member since:
2008-06-09

Responsibility? Lets talk about responsibility. How about the responsibility of the CEO of a publicly traded company to provide good leadership. How about the responsibility of the CEO to tell the truth and be honest about their ability and limitations. Jobs knew what being a CEO meant when he took the position. If he wanted privacy, he should have stepped down when he first got sick. Then he could have all the privacy in the world. I have much personal sympathy for anyone going through what he is going through. But lets be honest. Some things in life come with a cost. And the cost of being a famous CEO is lack of privacy when life turns to shit on you.


Jobs has already informed the public about his health pretty honestly twice now. Looks like he was surprised about the latest news and immediately informed the public and went on leave of absence.

That's all shareholders need to know. They have till June to decide if Jobs means that much to Apple's bottom line.

The press is now trying to determine specifics about the ailment and that is "out of line". Medical records are private for a reason and Doctor patient confidentiality exists for a reason too. That's why the patient has to authorize release of his/her records to a new doctor on the first visit.

By law a person's health is a private matter. It doesn't matter is Jobs is a CEO. Does Bloomberg care about every CEO's health? Do they really care if Eric Schmidt or Larry Ellison are sick? No. So the theory that the public has the right to know is not valid.

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: Wishful thinking
by mabhatter on Mon 19th Jan 2009 22:34 in reply to "RE: Wishful thinking"
mabhatter Member since:
2005-07-17

Responsibility? Lets talk about responsibility. How about the responsibility of the CEO of a publicly traded company to provide good leadership. How about the responsibility of the CEO to tell the truth and be honest about their ability and limitations. Jobs knew what being a CEO meant when he took the position. If he wanted privacy, he should have stepped down when he first got sick. Then he could have all the privacy in the world. I have much personal sympathy for anyone going through what he is going through. But lets be honest. Some things in life come with a cost. And the cost of being a famous CEO is lack of privacy when life turns to shit on you.


Realistically, "stockholders" are not Jobs boss... the Apple board of directors (elected by the stockholders) is Jobs boss. I situations like this it's important to remember that. His duty is to keep the board informed. Not the reporters, not the general public.. The board's duty is to decide if they want to accept his "leave" or replace him because it's hopeless and he's not coming back. Complain to the Apple Board, not to random newspapers, his actual health is nobody's business, in so far that his boss is the board of directors, not the general shareholders or even any one big share holder.

That said, I think the board is probably really gun-shy after the last time an Apple board kicked out Steve Jobs... the company went in the toilet for 5 years. In this case, the time is ripe for transition... will Steve see it and plan a graceful transition or make a mess.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Wishful thinking
by h3rman on Mon 19th Jan 2009 18:34 in reply to "Wishful thinking"
h3rman Member since:
2006-08-09


I.M.O, we in the west spend too much time worrying about the *rights* and *freedoms* of the press, and not enough time worrying about their *responsibilities*.


No the problem is its non-existent independence.

Reply Parent Score: 2