The extent of the Enquirer's naivete and stupidity in incomprehensible. I'll allow that the iPhone might be a story. But the Enquirer doesn't comprehend why it's a story. Every bit of their reporting was second- and third-hand. Reporting on technology is a hands-on thing. Not one of the five Enquirer reporters who worked on this story (Lauren Bishop and Mike Boyer blogging today, Alex Coolidge, James McNair, and Cliff Peale on his blog) this week ever got their hands on the device. The reporter has to see and touch the device to tell us how it works, and to tell us why it's important. The Enquirer is taking the only approach it seems to know how to report a story -- it only reports on what people say about something, and not anything seen first hand. Not even the reviews it published on the front page Thursday were its own. Apple fanatics are already getting their iPhone news off the web, and because the Enquirer doesn't cover technology seriously, no one looks to it for any expert coverage.
The cell phone has already become ubiquitous and changed how we live. That revolution has already happened. The impact of the iPhone is that it's going to change the way we use cell phones, maybe. The Enquirer has already missed reporting the revolution, but is trying to make up for it by over-covering the iPhone. The only thing this coverage sheds light on is the Enquirer's ineptitude and lack of sophistication about technology.