Is 'live' website new coverage going too far? "Live: Steve Jobs resigns as Apple CEO"

[muriel_volestrangler]

From the Daily Telegraph in Britain - and put as the top news story by Google News UK:

07.30 Good morning and welcome to this live blog after the announcement overnight that Steve Jobs will be stepping down as CEO of Apple.

A brief overview of the events from overnight:

- Steve Jobs, who has fought a long running battle with cancer, hands in his resignation to Apple's board of directors.

- Jobs asks to remain chairman of the board, director and Apple employee
...

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/apple/8721635/Steve-Jobs-resigns-as-Apple-CEO-live.html

I mean, is this really the kind of story in which minute-by-minute updates are useful? I can see it makes sense for a wide-ranging, fast-moving story like Libya, and maybe the Murdoch phone hacking story. But a live newsblog, just to collect a few reaction quotes from people as they get in to work in the UK? Silly.

[begin_within]

1. It's a lot more interesting to me than the silly wedding "royalty" earlier this year.

Does it merit a live news blog minute-by-minute updates? No of course not. But to me it's a more significant story than 99% of the celebrity news we are bombarded with every day. The things Steve Jobs has done have had an enormous impact on personal computing and personal gadgetry. And he has saved Apple more than once. What happens to Apple now that he is stepping down is a pretty significant story, in my view, although certainly not one in need of "live coverage."

[Sherman A1]

4. Agreed

[MADem]

2. I have found, somewhat to my own dismay, admittedly, that what "deserves" obsessed media coverage

and what GETS obsessed media coverage are two very different things.

Apparently, there's a market for this sort of thing--probably amongst people who have stock in the company or who are aficionados of the product.

They wouldn't cover it if they weren't getting some scratch in return for their efforts.

[DrDan]

3. Apple stock fell 7% after the announcement - this impacted pocketbooks, pensions etc

I can understand why people would like to know the latest.

Media - damned if they do, damned if they don't. Had it been downplayed, someone else would have complained. Isn't it better everyone has access to the latest info rather than just insiders?

[muriel_volestrangler]

5. I'm not saying his resignation shouldn't have been reported; but why minute-by-minute coverage?

Especially in the UK? That liveblog seems to have been reduced to digging up decades-old articles about Jobs. It's hardly breaking news they're putting in, is it?