If the new york slimes can get away with publishing documents that put our soldiers in harms way, surely Gizmodo should be protected by the First Amendment as well.
Personally, I thought the entire storyline that went with this was great reading, and good journalism. Tech stuff is what these guys do. Until they got the letter from Apple claiming the property they didn't know for sure that what they had wasn't some chicom knock-off. (which it could have easily been).
I understand Apple's desire for secrecy, as they use it as a marketing tool, but I really don't understand folks jumping on Gizmodo's case about it.
If the new york slimes can get away with publishing documents that put our soldiers in harms way, surely Gizmodo should be protected by the First Amendment as well.
The crime wasn't the writing of an article (or several articles) -- so "freedom of the press" is safe -- no worries there. LOL ...
It might "clear it up" for you if one was to consider that the police would be doing the exact same thing -- even if the articles were never written and no one in the public knew about this (and what happened) -- if the police had come across the information about the crime that was committed, by other means.
No, the "crime" wasn't "the article" that was written. The article that was written only let the police become aware of the crime that was committed.
SO..., that's why I said, earlier (up above) -- if you're going to commit a crime -- don't write an article about it and don't get on TV telling the world about it. That's how stupid criminals are caught, doncha know ... LOL ...