"Are Steve Jobs' innards really any of our business? wonders GigaOM, amid media hand-wringing and conspiracy-slinging over the Apple boss's recently disclosed liver transplant.
"Does the New York Times have a vendetta against Steve Jobs?"
asks Edible Apple.
Questions have been flying this week since Steve Jobs' return from his mysterious health sabbatical.
Last Friday the Wall Street Journal broke news that Jobs had received a liver transplant in Tennessee. Good for him, right? Live long and prosper.
But not so fast! Forbes claims Methodist hospital in Memphis denied that Jobs had been there—then admitted it!.
A NY Times article said the procedure "raised many questions...about the system for allocating scarce organs." Apple's "obsession with secrecy" was getting worse, another Times piece reported. Here we go again, Times blogger Joe Nocera added at Executive Suite, suggesting Apple's directors "have put Mr. Jobs's obsession with privacy ahead of the interest of the Apple shareholders." And it just keeps coming. Apple broke the law by lying about Steve's health, says Cult of Mac, quoting a professor of corporate communication. Exactly who's obsessed with what here?