Here in Canada, as in many other countries, the iPhone 3G went on sale July 11th. There were the predictable media stories about long lines and people camping overnight to get their hands on the precious gizmo. As usual, relatively few journalists had anything negative to say about the product; Apple can apparently do no wrong in traditional reporters’ eyes when it comes to their products.

There were also lots of negative stories about lack of availability, disappointed customers, high prices, which generally faulted the sole 3G Canadian carrier, Rogers Communications. But, you see, Rogers is not just a telecommunications company, it also owns many media properties. (And thank God they own the Blue Jays and so broadcast most of their games - replete with dozens of Rogers ads - when no one else might. But that’s another story.)

While I’m sure there was reason for at least some of the Rogers-bashing, I couldn’t help but make instant mental calculations of what organization ultimately owns the media outlet that I was reading / viewing / listening to.

I even saw one TV news segment by a Rogers competitor that focused on a guy with a “Robbers Communications” shirt, protesting outside a Rogers outlet while dozens of happy Apple zealots waiting in line paid him no heed. I wondered if the media somehow knew in advance that the guy would be there. The juxtaposition of fanatics and demonstrator was amusing.

Is there such thing as truly independent major media? Conglomerates and partnerships are everywhere. It’s harder and harder to know what’s objective news, what’s entertainment and what’s overblown competitive criticism, or if all are inexorably intertwined.