That's not shady in the least. That's journalism. They got the early scoop because someone left it in a bar. The fact that Apple's hype machine wants it to be a surprise isn't a consumer tech blog's problem.
That isn't what happened. Nor is it the case that they discouraged the finder from returning it. Finder tried to locate the owner, and then contacted Apple multiple times, eventually getting a support case opened that went nowhere.
So, Gizmodo said they would return it to Apple, and paid the finder. Then they promptly returned it to Apple, directly contacting the employee who lost it and making arrangements.
J: You work at Apple, right?
G: Um, I mean I can't really talk too much right now.
J: I understand. We have a device, and we think that maybe you misplaced it at a bar, and we would like to give it back.
I'm not suggesting they didn't return it, but that they specifically didn't hand it in. Why did they have to hunt down the owner? There's no reason they had to maintain possession.
> Finder tried to locate the owner, and then contacted Apple multiple times
Give it to the police. No consumer-electronics publication required.
They take the thing apart? So they "said they would return it", but not before taking the opportunity to fully evaluate the thing they decided to keep hold of?
Also, how diligent were they as self-appointed owner-finders?:
