We need traditional media, we are told from time to time, because all blogs do is regurgitate each other’s ramblings while newspapers report real news. I’m a fan of newspapers–I actually get three dead-tree editions delivered daily–but it ain’t necessarily so. The old media can recirculate bad info every bit as badly as the blogs.
A case in point is a meme making its way around the web about how some universities are, for reasons never quite specified, banning iPads from their campuses. This one seems to have started with a mostly correct April 6 Wall Street Journal online article about assorted difficulties that iPads were encountering on various university networks. The story noted that iPads can’t manage some security feature’s of George Washington University’s network, that Princeton had blocked some iPads from its network, and that Cornell was worried about the data demands of iPads overwhelming its network.
As the story made the rounds, problems became outright bans. The Christian Science Monitor reported on April 20 that Princeton had banned iPads. And BusinessWeek reports in its current issue: “Princeton University won’t allow its students to use the device on campus Wi-Fi networks because of data security worries.” Of course, dozens of blogs added to the noise.
The problem is that none of this is true. The Princeton story emerged first. The university’s network administrators started having problems with iPads when they first appeared on campus and the difficulty was traced to a disruptive interactions between the iPad and the system that assigns internet addresses to wireless devices. The Office of Information Technology has published and regularly updated detailed information on the status of the problem. At no time did Princeton ever ban iPads, though it has blocked misbehaving units from its network and warned students for a time that they were likely to have problems.
The Cornell situation is more clearcut. ““We have researched the issue and have found no negative impact at Cornell at this time,” the Cornell Daily Sun quoted university IT director Dave Vernon as saying. There is not and never has been a ban, and iPads are sold in the Cornell bookstore.
At George Washington, iPad-toting students do have a real problem, though they are not faced with any sort of ban. “The University has not banned the iPad,” its web site declares. The difficulty is that the GW wireless network requires software–apparently a virtual private networking client, though the web site is not explicit–that does not exist for the iPad, iPhone, or iPod Touch. No software, no access. The university says it hopes to have iPad connectivity available this summer.
In both the Princeton and GW cases, correct information was readily available on the universities’ web site. In the case of Cornell, there was no statement because there actually was no issue. The fact that there has been massive misinformation on the subject reflects the sorry fact that traditional media reporters and bloggers alike are far too ready to repeat each other without doing some basic reporting.
April 25, 2010 at 2:17 am |
Steve,
How do I reach you these days? Could you email me at marcydockery@gmail.com?
Thanks,
Marcy
April 26, 2010 at 2:41 pm |
Hi Steve Wildstrom, In reference to the media reporting until you clarified things..there is a saying in advertising that 85% of all advertising is shit…but then again 85% of everything is shit.
Thanks for your article. David Enock
April 26, 2010 at 3:17 pm |
Excellent article. Thank you for clarifying the confusion and enlightening the masses. Hopefully your article will be “mass circulation”.
April 26, 2010 at 3:55 pm |
See http://www.worldcorrespondents.com/latest-on-ipad-banned-from-israel-and-2-american-universities/883578#respond
for one of the many incorrect reports from 4/21, followed by a response which attempted to correct some of the errors.
Obviously it was easier for most of the media to run with the story than to check their facts.
April 26, 2010 at 4:22 pm |
very informative. Thanks for clarification
April 26, 2010 at 5:30 pm |
[…] scrive sul suo blog Steve Wildstrom, un articolo che sarebbe stato ignorato se l’ufficio stampa di Apple, come ci spiega Philip […]
April 26, 2010 at 5:30 pm |
Aren’t most of these problems arising because these campuses are using antiquated software that does not support iPv6, because they are using older software that only support iPv4?
April 26, 2010 at 5:54 pm |
No. The iPad, like the iPhone, is an IPv4 device. The Princeton IT department report is the most thorough explanation.
April 26, 2010 at 6:44 pm |
I would not say IPv4 is antiquated. It is still functional and there has not been much that I have seen to entice people to switch. How many of the popular devices you see on the market use that standard?
It can be very expensive and hard to switch over as well, corporations and distributed computing groups will have to determine when and how they will switch.
April 26, 2010 at 11:05 pm |
@swildstrom and Robert
I think Roger is suggesting that IPv6 may solve the reported source of Princeton’s problem. According to the original report, Princeton uses DHCP to share too few addresses among too many devices; and because of one of Apple’s power conserving tactics, the iPad doesn’t keep validating it’s client status.
So the question is not “Is IPv4 antiquated?”, the question is: “Is it time for IPv6 at Princeton?” considering that the number of devices on campus is only going to explode in the fall.
The question for other campus environments should be, “How much time do we have until this becomes a problem for us?”
April 26, 2010 at 11:46 pm
Thank you, well put. That’s exactly what I was trying to get at.
April 26, 2010 at 5:58 pm |
First of all, the newspaper is not “real news”, it is actually news that is “twisted and bent”. last but not least…. this is all bullshit
April 26, 2010 at 6:26 pm |
I’m going to be a bit of hyperbolic for a moment and say, “If you don’t know anything and can’t do anything you become a journalist.”
Having overstated the point, I will say that there are good journalists and the WSJ is far better than any other news publication I’ve read, with the possible exception of the Economist. However, it seems to me that anytime I read a story of which I actually have some firsthand knowledge, almost always there are some glaring errors–egregious enough in many circumstances that the whole tone of the article is adversely affected, leading to erroneous conclusions by readers without without such knowledge. Frankly, as a group, I don’t have a lot of respect for journalists.
The author is wise to get at least three newspapers–not relying on any one, or a few, sources is the only way readers have a chance to cut through the ignorance.
April 26, 2010 at 11:20 pm |
That is one more reason why I believe the iPad will kill – and not save -newspapers and magazines!
Magazines are to articles like record albums are to singles. I believe the iPad will do to magazines what the iPod did to record albums.
The magazine can perform one function that the record album does not. It can provide a brand identity to the enclosed articles – whereas most record albums feature only one group of artists; magazines are typically compilations of various authors. The problem is, what readers seek in a magazine “brand” is either quality, thoroughness, topicality, truthfulness, or some combination of these. A magazine stamps its brand on the enclosed articles via its editorial policy and staff. Competing against bloggers is – in most cases – a race to the bottom that is destroying the reputations of many magazines. I wonder how many of them will figure this out before they disappear?
April 26, 2010 at 6:31 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 26, 2010 at 6:31 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren't true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what happened. Princeton's Office of Information Technology noticed that some iPads […]
April 26, 2010 at 6:38 pm |
[…] league schools banning iPads. Unfortunately, they aren't true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what happened. Princeton's Office of Information Technology noticed that some iPads […]
April 26, 2010 at 6:39 pm |
[…] league schools banning iPads. Unfortunately, they aren't true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what happened. Princeton's Office of Information Technology noticed that some iPads […]
April 26, 2010 at 7:05 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren't true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what happened. Princeton's Office of Information Technology noticed that some iPads […]
April 26, 2010 at 7:23 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 26, 2010 at 7:33 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 26, 2010 at 7:48 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 26, 2010 at 7:58 pm |
Thank you, not just for correcting misinformation about this particular iPad issue, but for the more general point of being skeptical about “news” or whatever one sees in print or “on the internet.”
April 26, 2010 at 8:25 pm |
your gw link is broken
April 26, 2010 at 8:44 pm |
Thank you. The link has been fixed.
April 26, 2010 at 8:27 pm |
“No. The iPad, like the iPhone, is an IPv4 device. The Princeton IT department report is the most thorough explanation.”
I guess my next question would be why Princeton and other colleges are having problems with the iPad’s DHCP support, whereas other campuses across the country are not having problems. This is from a bulletin from the U. of Michigan, reporting on the problems that Princeton has reported: “Other colleges and universities have expressed concern about Apple’s DHCP iPad implementation. The design of MWireless and UM Wireless Network has minimized these issues on campus.”
How has Michigan (and many, many other campus IT department) minimized the problem?
April 27, 2010 at 2:07 am |
If they have a bigger supply of IPv4 addresses to hand out relative to the number of devices using them, the iPad holding on to them longer may not be such an issue.
April 26, 2010 at 11:20 pm |
[…] this rumor-spreading comes to us from former BusinessWeek tech columnist Steve Wildstrom. In this blog post, Wildstrom explores how the supposed campus bans on iPads are in fact nonexistent. Despite some […]
April 27, 2010 at 12:07 am |
[…] iPad Bans: Misinformation from Media Old and New We need traditional media, we are told from time to time, because all blogs do is regurgitate each other’s […] […]
April 27, 2010 at 5:00 am |
I read about ipad. it is not that good that was perceived to be. it is good but have limitations as well which some times let it down. although as a whole it is quite good.
April 27, 2010 at 8:00 am |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom which explains what […]
April 27, 2010 at 8:17 am |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 27, 2010 at 10:28 am |
[…] source doesn’t matter, whether it’s newspaper, TV or blog. Crap reporting from whatever source is crap. You know; it’s the message, not the medium and no, when it comes to reportage, the medium is […]
April 27, 2010 at 2:00 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 28, 2010 at 8:22 am |
[…] If you want to know what really happened — and how the disinformation spread — read Wildstrom's report here. […]
April 28, 2010 at 8:30 am |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 28, 2010 at 4:37 pm |
[…] banning iPads. Fortunately for students, they aren’t true. Philip Elmer-DeWitt points out an article by Steve Wildstrom that explains what […]
April 29, 2010 at 7:00 pm |
[…] de iPads em universidades, Steve Wildstrom veio a público prestar alguns esclarecimentos e encerrar a onda de especulações sobre o tema. No que diz respeito a Princeton, nenhum iPad está sendo arbitrariamente banido da universidade, […]
May 3, 2010 at 6:11 am |
[…] iPad Bans: Misinformation from Media Old and New « Steve Wildstrom on Tech Se dijo que algunas universidad americanas habían prohibido el iPad. Resulta que no era del todo cierto. […]
June 16, 2010 at 2:59 am |
Someone who say that The iPad in general is dumb. There are better, cheaper things available if you need somethign in between smart phone and a laptop.
July 28, 2011 at 7:09 am |
[…] Steve writes: As the story made the rounds, problems became outright bans. The Christian Science Monitor reported on April 20 that Princeton had banned iPads. And BusinessWeek reports in its current issue: “Princeton University won’t allow its students to use the device on campus Wi-Fi networks because of data security worries.” Of course, dozens of blogs added to the noise. […]