Josh...I genuinely appreciate the response, thank you.
To clarify, perceived bias and legitimate criticism that it can create are two very different things.
Here's the legit criticism: I'm critical of your editorial choice to relegate a big story to a minor site. Do you think that choice was a mistake, or would you rather respond about how little time you spend thinking about me personally? Considering the post on Mobile got all of 10 responses in the last day, and the one on the main site got 10 in less than 2 minutes, I think its evident both that is plenty newsworthy and that you had to be aware the play it would get on one site versus another.
Here's the perceived bias: I'm suspect that you did avoid it on the main site b/c Apple is a major advertiser. That's my opinion (one shared by many of your readers, and opposed by many too). I'll add that I support this opinion in large part because you take on your Apple critics with a lot more ferocity than those that accuse of Microsoft, Sony or whatever bias (see yours and Nilay's responses for examples of this).
I know you've got other things to do, and I could'a cared less if you responded to any of my comments. But the idea that your snark somehow de-legitimizes a reasonable critique of your editing skills is laughable. Cheers!

@Nilay -- I love the glib response...Josh is really delegating over there.
To be clear, nowhere on the just-recently-posted article on the main Engadget site is anyone asking (calling or demading) that it only should've run on the Mobile site. So now, not only is your reasoning for not running it on the main site suspect, but your defense with half-truths and sarcasm is a little thinner too...Cheers!

yeah, but the new editor doesn't reply himself when asked a direct question that he doesn't like (come on Josh, give us another glib answer).

@ Josh. The silence from you and Nilay speaks volumes.
As much as we all love the glib "It's weird, we either cover too much Apple news, or not enough!" responses that you give to legit criticism (very professional, by the way), you're changing the subject and you know it. This isn't about whether there is too much or too little iPhone news on Engadget, it's a question of whether or not you are offering objective reporting on the iPhone. When Engadget Classic ignores the biggest iPhone story of the day, week or month (and it's a negative story) but on the same day runs 4 stories regarding the device that are positive (7 stories if you count the last 48 hours), you have a balance problem.
Like it or not, that is a legitimate critique of your editorial standards. You are the head of the editorial department here, why is your only response glib denial?

Josh...I asked this question to Nilay, but I think it's fair to ask to you too.

Is the iPhone security flaw story more newsworthy than any or all of the following:

Philips iPod soundbar (today)
Jobs health (today)
Polish iPhone fakers (today)
iPhone vs. Sony XV1 (today)
Brando iPhone battery (today)
???

All those ran today (same day that major news outlets and blogs alike are calling consumer attention to the security flaw that you don't feel is newsworthy enough to run on the main engadget site. Why?

holy crap my comment got jumbled there...sorry.

Nilay...meet sarcasm, sarcasm say hi to Nilay.
You're right, it's not 40 posts and I apologize for using such an outlandishly outrageous number.

Can you give your readers a succinct reason why all the following are relevant to the site (wicker, read this too and learn to count) but major news about a major iPhone security flaw (one that's atop the NYTimes and Washington Post websites) is some how not newsworthy?

Philips iPod soundbar (today)
Jobs health (today)
Polish iPhone fakers (today)
iPhone vs. Sony XV1 (today)
Brando iPhone battery (today)
UK iPhone ad (yesterday)
DLO iPod/iPhone dock (yesterday)
iLuv iPod/iPhone dock (yesterday)

I know it's a small percentage of all the other news on this site (both because IFA is starting, and also because you guys do a good job of covering lots of stuff). I'm simply wondering why you don't have this HUGE bit of news on your main site...is iPhone users meant to believe that the iLuv iPhone Dock is more important than a critical security flaw? If EngadgetMobile exists for just this reason, but post anything on the main site at all about iPhone. If iPhone is legit topic for iPhone news, why not post the biggest iPhone news of the day, week or even month? The editorial decision-making is suspect and if you don't see that, Nilay, well then I don't know how else to put it.

I think all these posts should be on the site...Engadget is indeed correct that since it's the best selling portable electronics device ever, all the accessories news, company news and other news is relevant. The blatant lack of what is really, really big news makes it seem like you purposely are not posting it...

You're right...I'm an idiot.
I just figured when you post every little thing about a product, and justify the lovefest by saying that it's "the biggest consumer tech product of all time," then you might what to point out on your main site when that product produces an epic fail!
Idiotic me thought that news might be big enough for engadget.com, you know the same place where they post 40 iPhone stories a day.
I'm such a dummy, what was I thinking?!?!?

sorry if this posts twice. I never got confirm on the first one and find it a little suspect...
--------------------------------------
So while major news outlets and tech blogs are reporting on the critical iPhone flaw that gives access to user data in 3 easy steps -- even on locked iPhones -- Engadget is making the editorial choice to report on the more important, and more Apple-friendly gossip.

(This is the part where I say, again, "Thank you Gizmodo for ACTUALLY DOING YOUR JOB!!")

Derbeste...you're agreeing with me more than disagreeing.
Yes, Engadget has every right to moderate, censor and block their comments. That's their right as a corporation. But let's be clear, what Ryan did in shutting down comments was not an action of a moderator, it was authoratative, complete and total censorship of his readers' views.
My perception of Engadget is that they had some journalistic ideal. That ideal runs completely counter to their actions yesterday, regardless of what they can or can't do as a corporate being.
As a reporter myself, I find his desire to limit the public discourse disgusting...he has no business calling himself any sort of journalist (blogger or otherwise) if the knee-jerk reaction is to shut up people he doesn't like.