I let a lot go these days but sorry, that is a pathetic reason for an article.
It's really treating readers with contempt to think they want to be involved in this kind of lowest-common-denominator bottom-feeder pseudo journalism.
Spend more time writing news stories about news and less time with the patronizing sensationalist horse crap.
keep in mind though, Apple didn't actually 'invented' the tablet category, it already exist long before the iPad launched. Apple just make it so cool and good, that everybody now know what a tablet is.
Yes, the tablet category existed long befor the iPad. Apple got there quite early with a PAD in 1993 (the Newton Message Pad). Does anybody know of any "pads" before that?
Here is my Newton 2000 from 1997, sitting beside my iPad 1.
I let a lot go these days but sorry, that is a pathetic reason for an article.
It's really treating readers with contempt to think they want to be involved in this kind of lowest-common-denominator bottom-feeder pseudo journalism.
Spend more time writing news stories about news and less time with the patronizing sensationalist horse crap.
Hey "firefly," what does it taste like to have your mouth wrapped around the back end of anything and everything pooping out Android?
Note that Apple does not decide who to hire when their ads are created. That is done by the ads agency. And, the choice would be solely based on the appeal of the person and how they resonate to the target audience.
I doubt very much that the Ads agency of Apple would make as a pre-requesite in the preliminary screening of talents to sued in the ad: yp ask:
Do you use the Apple product that you are going to have a role in? That would border discrimination.
Ponder this. Steve Jobs sometimes use other people, apart from the usual Ive, and top tier staff in the presentation. Apple/Steve Jobs is famous for not showing its latest product to the public before the anouncement. So what product model is used in such ads
One more thing, product placement is very big in television and movies these days. Do you really think that all those handling or having those Apple products in the set are all users of Apple products?
What I can accept is that it is unlikely that Samsung already has the latest product to be used in such commercials. Deceptive? Not sure; Ads for the most part is about presenting a concept that should resonate to the viewer. I am sure that you heard all those stories about "artists" not liking the products that they may be asked to "act" in the shooting, as if they did like it.
Did anyone make a big deal of such "acting" to like the product by the artists involved?
It is being too fanatic (fanboism) to make such a big deal about artists models/being used, and singlinb out Samsung or Microsoft for having used them. As I stated at the start, the company does not decide who are recruited to play those roles. The ad agency does.
Yes, the tablet category existed long befor the iPad. Apple got there quite early with a PAD in 1993 (the Newton Message Pad). Does anybody know of any "pads" before that?
Here is my Newton 2000 from 1997, sitting beside my iPad 1.
Bill Gates showed a tablet with stylus ca 2005? and believed it was to become the future of personal computing. But Bill Gates dreams did not resonate with the consumers, primarily because he was thinking of it mainly as a computer (for techies); computers that many average consumers are afraid to use-- because they do not want to feel stupid with such a foreign machine, the computer.
Remember what Gates said, after he saw the iPad? "It does not even have a stylus." The implied but unsaid was that to Bill Gates, the iPad would fail.
Many consumers use their computer in a much simpler way than what techies used their computers. They do like their computers to help them do stuff that matter to them -- connecting with family and relatives, creating and sharing memories photoalbums (that is what made Kodak and all camera makers), except now it is digital. And perhaps do some creative stuff also.
Apple/Steve Jobs understood the needs of the consumers, but did even more... Maybe you may want to "use the iPad also for this. or that"... He integrated music to make the iPad even more integral to their lives. And more:
"...there's an App for that.... Only at Apple!"
All those years, it took a Steve Jobs to remember what matters to consumers. Now everyone is scrambling to follow his lead, even better him, if they can.
The Newton was a personal digital assistant. Thus, although it had some roles similar to the tablets of the mid 2000s, the Newton was never considered a portable computer in the same vein as the iPad.
I do not think there was a single person in the auditorium where they made the announcement. That too looked to be staged as well, you did not hear a single clap or comment, unlike an Apple event.
I don't get why people here are so upset or amused. I've been using my Galaxy Tab 8.975 for months now to save the lives of orphans and combat financial fraud - and all faster than the competition!
OMG, Samsung is so pathetic. Yeah, they have the thinnest tablet on the market... at least in England they'd get pulled from the air if they tried to run an ad like that. I guess they can spew whatever they want at a press release, but damn...
I'm sure there are going to be Apple haters out there saying that Apple does this all the time in their press events. Geez, Apple won't even leak what a product IS until they have it working and at least in production.
I come to AppleInsider to read thoughtful, well researched and breaking news on Apple products.
On interesting articles I then tend to browse the forum for, once again, thoughtful well researched comments. On a good day I gather more information from the comment section than the article itself.
IMO AI is still the best source of Apple news, not just because of the articles but because of the intelligence of its forum members and the quality of their writing.
Sadly, and with increasing frequency, AI seems to be trolling for the dullards and brainless scum that lurk on the internet.
If it were just a matter of simply skipping those articles then I could live with it, but unfortunately the same simpletons start to infect the other article threads as well.
So why am I here? Because it's still the best source of Apple news.
Why am I so passionate about it? Because I value the writing and opinions of the intelligent members of these forums so much that I'm actually distressed by the attempt to "dumb down" the site and open the flood gates to every moron on the Internet.
I come off sounding like a pompous ass, I know, but is it really too much to ask to want to read intelligent insight from intelligent people without skimming through a hundred comments about how shit some non-Apple product is written by some dullard that has never used it?
Me too. This is not a scandal, as far as I know everyone just assumes the "real people" in these slickly produced things are not actually real people.
In the U.S., such ads (where there is an implication that the ad contains actual consumers) must say "actor portrayal" or something of the sort. It might be in tiny type and flash by faster than mere mortals can see it, but it has to be there. You see this in pharmaceutical advertising all the time. It also has to state if the claims are typical, which is why there's a disclaimer in virtually all weight loss advertising, even that which does contain actual consumers, that their weight loss claims are not typical. I used to produce web sites for an infomercial company, so I'm familiar with all the legal disclaimer stuff.
Note that Apple does not decide who to hire when their ads are created. That is done by the ads agency. And, the choice would be solely based on the appeal of the person and how they resonate to the target audience....
You're missing the point entirely.
It's not a matter of using actors for ads it's a matter of using actors but telling us they are not actors. Almost all advertisements use actors, but it is technically illegal (in most western countries anyway), to lie in advertising or to directly mislead consumers about your product. They didn't even bother to use that old dodge of putting microscopic writing on the bottom of the screen that lets you know the situation is simulated.
The laws against this sort of deception have never been taken off the books and those of us old enough to remember when the government and the truth in advertising agencies actually took people who made ads like this to court, and eventually to jail are a bit upset that nowadays this is just par for the course. In fact it's underhanded, immoral and still (technically) illegal.
Advertising is quite literally an art that is based on deception. The whole idea is to fool people into using your product by presenting it in the best possibly light and to cover up your products flaws through creative wordplay and imagery. Out and out lying is still not allowed though, and in an industry that's "right on the edge" as it were between misdirection and outright lies, it's arguably even more important to notice when an advertiser crosses that line.
If these laws aren't upheld then there is nothing to stop anyone from saying anything they want about any product. That's the whole point.
Here Samsung is announcing a product that doesn't even exist. They are presenting "real people" who aren't actually real, who are then telling long detailed lies about using the non-existent product. They are also directly, themselves, and completely outside of the issue of the commercials, lying about the features the product has.
Advertising is of course a shady business, but almost no company is willing to go this far even in today's market. Samsung has crossed a huge line here and should really be taken to task over it.
This is literally no different than a car commercial that lies about the MPG the car gets, or how safe it is in an accident. If you can produce outright lies about your product and get away with it, the whole system will fall apart.
Comments
That was just sad.
It's really treating readers with contempt to think they want to be involved in this kind of lowest-common-denominator bottom-feeder pseudo journalism.
Spend more time writing news stories about news and less time with the patronizing sensationalist horse crap.
keep in mind though, Apple didn't actually 'invented' the tablet category, it already exist long before the iPad launched. Apple just make it so cool and good, that everybody now know what a tablet is.
Yes, the tablet category existed long befor the iPad. Apple got there quite early with a PAD in 1993 (the Newton Message Pad). Does anybody know of any "pads" before that?
Here is my Newton 2000 from 1997, sitting beside my iPad 1.
I let a lot go these days but sorry, that is a pathetic reason for an article.
It's really treating readers with contempt to think they want to be involved in this kind of lowest-common-denominator bottom-feeder pseudo journalism.
Spend more time writing news stories about news and less time with the patronizing sensationalist horse crap.
Hey "firefly," what does it taste like to have your mouth wrapped around the back end of anything and everything pooping out Android?
Will you ever get you fill?
I doubt very much that the Ads agency of Apple would make as a pre-requesite in the preliminary screening of talents to sued in the ad: yp ask:
Do you use the Apple product that you are going to have a role in? That would border discrimination.
Ponder this. Steve Jobs sometimes use other people, apart from the usual Ive, and top tier staff in the presentation. Apple/Steve Jobs is famous for not showing its latest product to the public before the anouncement. So what product model is used in such ads
One more thing, product placement is very big in television and movies these days. Do you really think that all those handling or having those Apple products in the set are all users of Apple products?
What I can accept is that it is unlikely that Samsung already has the latest product to be used in such commercials. Deceptive? Not sure; Ads for the most part is about presenting a concept that should resonate to the viewer. I am sure that you heard all those stories about "artists" not liking the products that they may be asked to "act" in the shooting, as if they did like it.
Did anyone make a big deal of such "acting" to like the product by the artists involved?
It is being too fanatic (fanboism) to make such a big deal about artists models/being used, and singlinb out Samsung or Microsoft for having used them. As I stated at the start, the company does not decide who are recruited to play those roles. The ad agency does.
CGC
Yes, the tablet category existed long befor the iPad. Apple got there quite early with a PAD in 1993 (the Newton Message Pad). Does anybody know of any "pads" before that?
Here is my Newton 2000 from 1997, sitting beside my iPad 1.
Bill Gates showed a tablet with stylus ca 2005? and believed it was to become the future of personal computing. But Bill Gates dreams did not resonate with the consumers, primarily because he was thinking of it mainly as a computer (for techies); computers that many average consumers are afraid to use-- because they do not want to feel stupid with such a foreign machine, the computer.
Remember what Gates said, after he saw the iPad? "It does not even have a stylus." The implied but unsaid was that to Bill Gates, the iPad would fail.
Many consumers use their computer in a much simpler way than what techies used their computers. They do like their computers to help them do stuff that matter to them -- connecting with family and relatives, creating and sharing memories photoalbums (that is what made Kodak and all camera makers), except now it is digital. And perhaps do some creative stuff also.
Apple/Steve Jobs understood the needs of the consumers, but did even more... Maybe you may want to "use the iPad also for this. or that"... He integrated music to make the iPad even more integral to their lives. And more:
"...there's an App for that.... Only at Apple!"
All those years, it took a Steve Jobs to remember what matters to consumers. Now everyone is scrambling to follow his lead, even better him, if they can.
The Newton was a personal digital assistant. Thus, although it had some roles similar to the tablets of the mid 2000s, the Newton was never considered a portable computer in the same vein as the iPad.
CGC
What's next? Are we to find out that Justin Long is not really a Mac?
I assumed that everyone in commercials was an actor!
Whats funny about that however is that its common knowledge based on interviews that the PC guy John Hodgman is a long long time Mac user.
I do not think there was a single person in the auditorium where they made the announcement. That too looked to be staged as well, you did not hear a single clap or comment, unlike an Apple event.
Cardboard cut outs
Hey "firefly," what does it taste like to have your mouth wrapped around the back end of anything and everything pooping out Android?
Will you ever get you fill?
You see this AI? A fine example of the perils of selling out on journalistic integrity.
If you start trolling for the bottom-feeders all you're going to end up with is the scum.
You see this AI? A fine example of the perils of selling out on journalistic integrity.
If you start trolling for the bottom-feeders all you're going to end up with is the scum.
And posting with so much with passion? Do have the same dreams like the hero in "The Catcher in the Rye"?
CGC
OMG, Samsung is so pathetic. Yeah, they have the thinnest tablet on the market... at least in England they'd get pulled from the air if they tried to run an ad like that. I guess they can spew whatever they want at a press release, but damn...
I'm sure there are going to be Apple haters out there saying that Apple does this all the time in their press events. Geez, Apple won't even leak what a product IS until they have it working and at least in production.
So why are you here then?
I come to AppleInsider to read thoughtful, well researched and breaking news on Apple products.
On interesting articles I then tend to browse the forum for, once again, thoughtful well researched comments. On a good day I gather more information from the comment section than the article itself.
IMO AI is still the best source of Apple news, not just because of the articles but because of the intelligence of its forum members and the quality of their writing.
Sadly, and with increasing frequency, AI seems to be trolling for the dullards and brainless scum that lurk on the internet.
If it were just a matter of simply skipping those articles then I could live with it, but unfortunately the same simpletons start to infect the other article threads as well.
So why am I here? Because it's still the best source of Apple news.
Why am I so passionate about it? Because I value the writing and opinions of the intelligent members of these forums so much that I'm actually distressed by the attempt to "dumb down" the site and open the flood gates to every moron on the Internet.
I come off sounding like a pompous ass, I know, but is it really too much to ask to want to read intelligent insight from intelligent people without skimming through a hundred comments about how shit some non-Apple product is written by some dullard that has never used it?
.. I wonder if they will pay people to camp out and form lines outside of BB. And where does one apply for these jobs?
MoveOn.org
Me too. This is not a scandal, as far as I know everyone just assumes the "real people" in these slickly produced things are not actually real people.
In the U.S., such ads (where there is an implication that the ad contains actual consumers) must say "actor portrayal" or something of the sort. It might be in tiny type and flash by faster than mere mortals can see it, but it has to be there. You see this in pharmaceutical advertising all the time. It also has to state if the claims are typical, which is why there's a disclaimer in virtually all weight loss advertising, even that which does contain actual consumers, that their weight loss claims are not typical. I used to produce web sites for an infomercial company, so I'm familiar with all the legal disclaimer stuff.
Note that Apple does not decide who to hire when their ads are created. That is done by the ads agency. And, the choice would be solely based on the appeal of the person and how they resonate to the target audience....
You're missing the point entirely.
It's not a matter of using actors for ads it's a matter of using actors but telling us they are not actors. Almost all advertisements use actors, but it is technically illegal (in most western countries anyway), to lie in advertising or to directly mislead consumers about your product. They didn't even bother to use that old dodge of putting microscopic writing on the bottom of the screen that lets you know the situation is simulated.
The laws against this sort of deception have never been taken off the books and those of us old enough to remember when the government and the truth in advertising agencies actually took people who made ads like this to court, and eventually to jail are a bit upset that nowadays this is just par for the course. In fact it's underhanded, immoral and still (technically) illegal.
Advertising is quite literally an art that is based on deception. The whole idea is to fool people into using your product by presenting it in the best possibly light and to cover up your products flaws through creative wordplay and imagery. Out and out lying is still not allowed though, and in an industry that's "right on the edge" as it were between misdirection and outright lies, it's arguably even more important to notice when an advertiser crosses that line.
If these laws aren't upheld then there is nothing to stop anyone from saying anything they want about any product. That's the whole point.
Here Samsung is announcing a product that doesn't even exist. They are presenting "real people" who aren't actually real, who are then telling long detailed lies about using the non-existent product. They are also directly, themselves, and completely outside of the issue of the commercials, lying about the features the product has.
Advertising is of course a shady business, but almost no company is willing to go this far even in today's market. Samsung has crossed a huge line here and should really be taken to task over it.
This is literally no different than a car commercial that lies about the MPG the car gets, or how safe it is in an accident. If you can produce outright lies about your product and get away with it, the whole system will fall apart.