Boom Box

Apple faced  a burst  of negative PR this week, after an iPod Touch exploded.

Ken Stanborough accidentally dropped his daughter’s iPod: “It made a hissing noise,” he told The Times, “I could feel it getting hotter in my hand, and I thought I could see vapour”. Mr Stanborough rather sensibly hurled the gadget out of the back door: “Within 30 seconds there was a pop, a big puff of smoke and it went 10ft in the air”.

Touchy subject: the offending iPod

Interestingly, the media did not attack Apple for the technical problems. And with good reason. For years now, hardly a month has gone by without a news story on someone who was singed, scorched or otherwise lightly toasted by an exploding battery. Unfortunately, the elements that make up our current Lithium Ion batteries are just not very stable and high-speed impacts or extreme heat can tip them over the edge. Despite this the technology is still pretty safe. How many people do you know who have seen their phone or laptop spontaneously explode? It is extremely rare, but when it does happen companies are understandably keen to keep a lid on it.

No surprise then that most of the negative fallout focused on how Apple’s legal team handled the incident: trying to silence the Stanborough family with a non-disclosure agreement in exchange for a refund. That was when then the real fireworks began.

Chantelle and 13 year old Alfie story faces PCC enquiry

God help us all

Quite apart from the debacle surrounding the conception of baby Maisie, my own personal feeling is that it is wholly inappropriate for the parents of little Alfie and Chantelle to be brokering deals with the media during a truly critical time in the lives of all those concerned.

The number one concern of any parent has to be the emotional and physical welfare of their children (and in this case, their children’s child too) and I really do fail to see how allowing your child to be plastered across worldwide media being portrayed as thick, immature and loose helps them with the mammoth task of raising a child.

 

Thankfully, it looks like the PCC (Press Complaints Commission) could also be on the side of common-sense too.

 

Announcing the inquiry, a PCC spokesman quoted clause 6(iv) of the Editors’ Code of Practice which says: ‘Minors must not be paid for material involving children’s welfare, nor parents or guardians for material about their children or wards, unless it is clearly in the child’s interests.’

 

The PCC statement said: “Newspapers are allowed to breach this rule if there is a demonstrable public interest.” 

As an aside, note the difference between ‘public interest’ and ‘interesting to the public’.  This is where The News of the World fell down in reporting Max Mosely’s orgy.  Had the orgy actually had Nazi overtones, it may have been in the public interest to report the goings on, but your bog standard S&M orgy is not in the public interest…

 

Anyway, back to the PCC statement: “The PCC will make a public ruling on the matter when it has completed its investigation.”

 

“The commission has powers – under which it is conducting this inquiry – to launch investigations of its own volition.”

 Let’s see how this one unfolds….