New York Times gets Gizmodo treatment from Apple after negative reports

1246710

Comments

  • al_bundyal_bundy Posts: 1,525member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by lightknight View Post


    I don't know about the quality of the newspaper, but it is a bit troubling that companies would influence reports in such a way. Should not there be some FRAND laws to protect news from unfair reporting due to this behaviour? Imagine if another, more important company (in terms of danger) like nuclear reactors manufacturers, was to use that Apple tactic of only giving interviews to newspapers that report positively on them... that's pretty much a threat to liberty, isn't it?



    the truth is that these workers make 5 times the average salary in China and if they didn't work in a factory the only thing they would do is work on a farm.



    they grew up with little to no education and aren't qualified to do anything else
  • peterbraypeterbray Posts: 1member
    The New York Times does not qualify as legitimate news media. Thank you for ignoring them!!!



    Peter
  • ka47ka47 Posts: 25member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Prof. Peabody View Post


    Seems fair to me.



    Yellow journalism is yellow journalism whether it's practiced by a bunch of high school kids or the old farts on the New York Times. They knew they were publishing half-truths and untruths. Que sera sera as Doris Day would say.



    If Apple continued to treat them like other news sources it would send the wrong message. If only other companies, government agencies and so on would do the same then we wouldn't be subjected to so much crap and lies disguised as entertainment and "news."



    Well Said!!!
  • dagamer34dagamer34 Posts: 494member
    Here's the bigger, more fair question. If Walt Mossberg ever had anything genuinely negative to say about Apple, would he print it? I mean they invited John Gruber over the New York Times, who has millions more readers as a company.



    Regardless of who you are, I prefer honest reviews about products instead of paid ones, which is why unless a journalist is willing to put down their own money for a product without any special access, I already consider it tainted. But to each their own.
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post


    I read the whole piece and the Times made no claim that Apple was the worst offender. Apple is notable because it is very large and very profitable. And yes, a company making a lot of money will be held to higher standards for working conditions of the people contributing to make that profit happen. That some of you are shocked, shocked that this might be the case is frankly amazing. Apple is not the worst offender, but it is the most important one.



    Success is great, but its sister is scrutiny, and Apple better get used to that.



    Guys like Gruber depend on Apple to make a living. I read Daring Fireball, and its a fine blog to get insight into Apple's thinking, but when it comes to things Apple would rather not talk about, the Upton Sinclair rule applies: It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!



    People are gonna assume Apple's the worst offender and here's why. Quarter after quarter Apple posts record sales while all other tech companies post dismal sales. So what's easier to believe? That the workers building iPads are forced to work long grueling hours or the workers building Xooms are? A great many of Apples customers are vegans, don't wear leather/fur, ride bicycles to reduce their carbon footprint, and will protest if there's an allegation if their precious Apple products are built under harsh conditions. They don't care if another company's product is built under the same conditions, just like you wouldn't care if the neighbors kid is failing in school but will raise hell if your kid is. Every once in awhile the king needs to be reminded that he's just a man.
  • stlbluesfanstlbluesfan Posts: 353member
    Predicatable responses. Apple is dissed and the hoards decend upon the evil offender. Add another to the fanboi hitlist! LOL
  • ka47ka47 Posts: 25member
    I cancelled my subscription with NYT right after that stupid article. How could they publish such lies and blame it all on Apple! It is obvious they are just trying to generate some traffic to their dying newspaper business! Anyways, it's about time to stop killing trees!
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by krreagan View Post


    This is exactly what Apple has done with the current independent audits going on with the FLA.

    The NYT is a rag that publishes "entertainment" and should not be confused with a news provider. There are very few news providers left in the US and none of them are for-profit organizations. They are entertainment engines only incapable of publishing a story for the information itself without "juicing it up" to increase its entertainment value.



    I think SJ would disagree with you, he held the NYT in high regard.
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,376member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by StLBluesFan View Post


    Predicatable responses. Apple is dissed and the hoards decend upon the evil offender. Add another to the fanboi hitlist! LOL



    Dogpile on the rabbit!!!



    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vcqdz...e_gdata_player
  • matrix07matrix07 Posts: 1,993member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dagamer34 View Post


    Regardless of who you are, I prefer honest reviews about products instead of paid ones,



    Then why do you defend NYT when the article was written for one thing and one thing only: click bait? If you have a bit of knowledge about the background of all of this Chinese workers things you would know the article was anything but honest.
  • alonso perezalonso perez Posts: 385member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Lukeskymac View Post


    Wait, so now an article needs to proclaim itself as yellow journalism to be considered as such?







    The point is that people accusing the Times of invention should not do the same thing they claim to be against, assuming they care about their credibility.



    Other than vague accusations of stating "half truths", making "straw men", or being "yellow journalism", I have yet to see a specific claim of the Times falsified.
  • applesauce007applesauce007 Posts: 1,242member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Apple ][ View Post


    Awesome news! I am happy!



    Fuck the New York Times, and that's coming from me, a born and bred New Yorker. The New York Times is an extreme left leaning, trashy newspaper that went went too far this time with their lies. I thought that the New York Times was supposed to be a so-called respected newspaper, not a tabloid that engaged in slander, ignorant rumors and cheap lies.



    Apple has every right to tell them to fuck off. I would do the exact same thing too. Anybody here attempting to blame or criticize Apple is totally clueless and hypocritical. No way would anybody tolerate others spreading lies about them, if it were you that somebody was spreading lies about.



    How does somebody deal with douchebags? You tell them to fuck off, and you certainly don't invite them to any events that you will be having.



    If I were in charge of Apple, any ignorant person who signed one of those brain dead petitions about the false and fabricated worker abuse would have their names entered into a global database and they would never, ever be allowed to purchase any more Apple products for as long as they lived. Fuck them too.



    And if anybody thinks that it is Apple who is in the wrong, then I suggest that you boycott Apple. Do something about it. Stand up for your beliefs and don't be a pussy, even if your beliefs happen to be completely retarded, false and ignorant. Apple doesn't need the New York Times and Apple certainly doesn't need you.





    Whoa, whoa, easy there partner...



    I agree with most of your post except for the customers parts. Apple needs every single customer it can get.



    I think the New York Times should really focus on fixing their iPad app instead of trying to bash Apple Inc. I actually told them just that this morning as I cancelled my iPad subscription. The paper on the iPad is not like the printed paper. It's more like bits and pieces of the printed paper with no clear separation between the today's paper and yesterday's and no back-issues.



    I hope the NYT can get its act together on the iPad soon.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by radster360 View Post


    Nice going Apple! I am sure New York Times will write another negative editorial about their mis-treatment!



    The New York Times is the worst Apple hating rag on the planet. Good riddance!
  • goodgriefgoodgrief Posts: 137member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    When Apple messes up, or is doing something badly, they deserve to be called out on it like anyone else.



    And that's the problem. Apple isn't treated like everyone else. Apple is frequently singled out, and subject to accusations based on half (or completely unfounded) truths, no doubt because 1) their significant public profile makes for great click-bait (or paper sales), and 2) Apple has a history of not playing the "journalism publicity game" and pandering to the media.



    Case in point, these altruistic "journalists" report workers at an "Apple" factory being driven to suicide because of the working conditions. Here's the problem; the alleged incident happened at a Foxconn factory that assembled XBox units, not even Apple products. Apple is just one of many Foxconn clients, and ironically makes the some of the greatest demands of it's suppliers (including Foxconn) for workplace standards where Apple products are assembled, but somehow Apple is responsible for this? Why didn't the journalist point at Microsoft? Better yet, why didn't they point out that the Chinese government allows this at all? Why didn't they point out the irony that Foxconn has some of the best working environments in China (enough so that people flock to Foxconn offices in droves whenever a job is made available), and that Apple has been at the head of the vanguard that's been pushing Chinese suppliers to improve working conditions further? Frankly, compared to "everyone else", Apple is pretty damned squeaky-clean.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    Yes how childish of the NYT to dare to do some real investigative journalism and publish those reports. And how very adult of Apple to respond in the way they allegedly have by not inviting them to media events.



    1) "real investigative journalism" requires investigation, and unbiased journalistic integrity. Neither was observed in the NYT article.



    2) All other considerations aside, why should Apple invite the NYT to a press conference if Apple thinks they won't get positive press from their attendance? Regardless of accuracy, if you call me nasty names, why would I want to invite you to play in my sandbox? Or, using a more "adult" metaphor, if I sponsor an event, why would I invite a party who I don't believe would contribute positively to the outcome of the event?



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    I thought Apple was doing some smart things in response to the articles published by the NYT.



    And Apple was doing the same thing before the NYT article - so it achieved nothing - other than increasing NYT circulation.



    Quote:
    Originally Posted by eksodos View Post


    However, being seen to bully those who dare publish negative reports about your company might make people question the sincerity of certain protestations.



    I doubt NYT will be too offended though. Judging by those who were able to release lengthy scoops today, most of those in the room were probably bloggers known for kissing Apples ass at every opportunity. i.e. few real journalists.



    Definition:

    "bully: use superior strength or influence to intimidate (someone), typically to force him or her to do what one wants"



    Not being invited to a press conference is not "bullying". Since the NYT and Apple have no other conflicting interests, and no competitive activities, if anything Apple is trying to avoid NYT media "bullying", since the NYT has much greater media strength/influence (being of the media itself).
  • krreagankrreagan Posts: 218member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by dasanman69 View Post


    I think SJ would disagree with you, he held the NYT in high regard.



    Take a look at this article for example! What frame of reference is it reported from? Not the frame of the workers that's for sure. There are many other companies that use the same manufactures but are only touched on in the article. Apple is singled out as the "villan". Is that truly impartial journalism? or sensationalism to roast the "hot selling" company to seel papers. That's an easy answer!

    I use to hold them in high regard as well but have seen them stray from their moral duty as a news provider much more in the past 5-10 years. It's happening a lot lately.
  • boredumbboredumb Posts: 1,118member
    I agree that there isn't much to admire in the NYT's articles on this subject...

    Still, this seems kind of snotty and juvenile on Apple's part.



    "Keep your friends close, but your enemies, closer."
  • The NYT is one of "the" publications of the ruling elite, along with WSJ. Remember how the Times served as a conduit for the war propaganda leading up to Bush's invasion of Iraq? The Times gave Judith Miller carte blanche to report all sorts of lies about the supposed threats posed by Saddam Hussein and Iraq, never mind giving William Safire a column on the Op-Ed to do his part to get us cranked up for war. Leading a country to war based upon lies is not what a "liberal" publication would do.



    It's clear the Times has become anti-Apple, but let's not call them liberal - they're anything but.
  • berpberp Posts: 136member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Alonso Perez View Post


    ...........

    .......

    ........

    Success is great, but its sister is scrutiny, and Apple better get used to that.



    Guys like Gruber depend on Apple to make a living. I read Daring Fireball, and its a fine blog to get insight into Apple's thinking, but when it comes to things Apple would rather not talk about, the Upton Sinclair rule applies: It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends upon his not understanding it!



    Put Gruber on the market, I'll wager Apple's market cap he'd be snatched up by either Google or the NYT within a 'breathalyzer test' time frame. Although chances are, for the sake of amoral continuity, they'd figure out coming together on a joint bidding exercise.



    Gruber, I'm convinced, would turn them down, ...for the sake of moral continuity.
  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by Rogifan View Post


    Does anyone here really believe the NY Times gives a s**t about Chinese workers? No they want hits on their site, people to buy their paper



    I hope that the NYT does not get emotionally involved with the subject matter. I think that they should be dispassionate, and call the facts as they lay.



    IMO, all the media outlets want people to buy their product.
  • tallest skiltallest skil Posts: 39,984member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by I am a Zither Zather Zuzz View Post


    I hope that the NYT does not get emotionally involved with the subject matter. I think that they should be dispassionate, and call the facts as they lay.



    IMO, all the media outlets want people to buy their product.



    And maybe if they were actually being dispassionate about it and actually printed facts, people would.



    The worst part about media these days is that they never print the truth. They just shirk around it or ignore it in favor of trivial nonsense about celebrities or funny animal videos.
Sign In or Register to comment.