I guess I was sort of thinking of the financial impact, but only in a secondary sense. My real problem with iReport (or any local newscast even that tells people to send in their videos, etc.) is that it seems like the real motivation on the part of news outlets is to save a few bucks by having people do some of the reporting legwork for free in exchange for the chance to be mentioned on television for 2 or 3 seconds. Also, depending on how it’s branded it has the potential to be mistaken for vetted, fact-checked reporting.

On a somewhat tangential note I’m not allowed to listen to talk radio (or anything, musical or otherwise) at my day job. Thanks for the harsh reminder of my dismal existence.

If you invested in Apple and took a hit because of rumours, that is exactly what happens in the stock market. You accepted your risks when you entered. Don’t be telling me or anyone to silence some communication system because it happened to carry some false news. Just go back to your stock market and gamble some more, and leave the levers of democracy alone. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

There have been many instances of companies relying too heavily on the cult figure of a charismatic leader and later being hard hit when he or she moved on.

I am not convinced that, deep down, this is not the case with Apple, however, I strongly believe the company needs to manage the balance of Steve’s public image and the company’s leadership in such a way that the markets and press start to understand that although Steve is an important part of the equation, there can still be a successful, creative and profitable future without him.