New York Times gets Gizmodo treatment from Apple after negative reports

1356710

Comments

  • Quote:
    Originally Posted by anthropic View Post


    It's such a pity Apple behaves so poorly, their childish corporate behaviour really detracts from what should be more news about their awesome products.



    on the contrary, i'm glad to see that this sort of thing still goes on under Cook's reign.
  • nvidia2008nvidia2008 Posts: 9,262member
    Apple giveth, and Apple taketh away
  • sapporobabyrtrnssapporobabyrtrns Posts: 824member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


    That's ironic since the quality of NYT articles suggests they're mostly written by children.



    Nice one. +1
  • rogifanrogifan Posts: 10,669member
    Apple doesn't need the NY Times. How long has Apple been assembling stuff in China? How long have they been contracting with Foxconn? Yet the NY Times doesn't seem to care until Apple becomes the most valuable company in the world. 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 so they stick Apple on page 1. And of course in the DC/NY media axis anything reported in the NY Times gets picked up and reported everywhere else.
  • freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,345member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Oleia View Post


    Calling ALL JOURNALIST, BLOGGERS, the media as a whole to take action and condemn such acts by Apple in trying to control the freedom of speaking and/or writing whether for or against the company. This is not about the stated article any more, this is already a form of manipulation whether directly or indirectly to withhold information which are against Apple and which the public must know.



    Apple, being the attraction and currently being in the limelight, must realize that in your current position as a "Leader" in consumer electronics garners attention and being thrust into public scrutiny is inevitable. You are not perfect and the public will surely criticize. What you should do is improve, take action, prove whats true and whats not true and not to resort to your "childish" acts towards NYTimes.



    Apple is not objecting to public scrutiny. They're objecting to bad journalism, with NYT publishing inflammatory half-truths and singling them out in an area (factory work conditions) where they're far more progressive than their competitors. The article made it seem as if Apple is either the only or the worst offender when in fact the problem is endemic to all of China, and if anything Apple is on the leading edge of US companies pressuring Chinese factories to establish safer and fairer workplace policies.



    The NYT could have written a piece about Chinese work conditions in general and pointed out that a large majority of the products Americans buy are made overseas, but instead they chose to single out Apple as the bad guys in order to get more traffic.



    BTW, considering "Oleia's" profile shows she just joined the forum and this is his/her only post, it wouldn't surprise me if he/she works for the New York Times.
  • freediverxfreediverx Posts: 1,345member
    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.



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



    When it comes to public opinion and perceptions of integrity, it would be amusing to see how the New York Times stacks up against Apple. The myth of journalism being an honorable profession died about 20 or 30 years ago. Let's not forget we live in a time when a couple of back to back comedy shows provide better news coverage than all of the "news" channels combined.
  • dasanman69dasanman69 Posts: 12,677member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Anoneemoose View Post


    The absurd part of the NYT reporting is the attempt to gain hits by implying that Apple is the sole culprit. The entire electronics industry is responsible for the enabling the Chinese government in not enforcing good work conditions. Of all the companies at least Apple is trying. This just reeks of Antennagate where dozens of phone manufacturers had the exact same problem as Apple but the media vultures piled on Apple to gain hits. Yellow journalism is alive and well...



    Try reading before offering your opinion.



    http://pogue.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/...p-electronics/
  • blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 1,425member
    Seems the New York Times has decided to declare war on Apple. Seems an odd choice, but so be it.
  • gtrgtr Posts: 3,210member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by F1Ferrari View Post


    A very wise man once told me to never believe anything said before a "but".



    It seems like we have a sudden influx of new trolls these last few days. Apple crossing the $500 per share must have brought them out of the woodwork.



    Look at all these poor bastards without a life.



    This is a crack-up.



    The industry innovators of the past three decades are terrified of what the dying newspaper industry thinks of them. Absolutely quaking in their boots.



    Look at everything that has been thrown at Apple recently.



    And what has it done?



    Their share-price soars!



    Their war-chest is bursting!



    Store after crowded store opens, great product after product is released, the updates flow regularly, as do the kick-ass reviews, and the consumers love them!



    Post all you want, guys.



    Hell, post more.



    Because every post is a big 'self-pwn' as the big, bad, Apple wastes more of your lives. And the rest of us know you've got nothing better to do.



    And in ten years time, when you look back, you are going to be utterly crushed by the fact that they were just getting started.



    And there was absolutely nothing that you could do to do to stop it.
  • alonso perezalonso perez Posts: 385member
    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."



    So what were, exactly, the falsehoods in the article?



    Apple can do whatever it wants, but the Times is not Gizmodo and Apple is seriously confused if it thinks it is. If the Times publishes something, it's reproduced all over the world, and will continue to be regardless of access given to Tim Cook.



    Before it was published, Apple had a chance to review the article and render false any false statements in it, thus preventing their publication, but chose to make no comment.
  • whozownwhozown Posts: 128member
    That's what they got for pissing off their rich popular friend. Booted out of the circle.
  • mcrcnmcrcn Posts: 27member
    Just like the NYT to do a hit job on Apple and then complain they do not get an exclusive from them a week later.
  • alonso perezalonso perez Posts: 385member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by freediverx View Post


    Apple is not objecting to public scrutiny. They're objecting to bad journalism, with NYT publishing inflammatory half-truths and singling them out in an area (factory work conditions) where they're far more progressive than their competitors. The article made it seem as if Apple is either the only or the worst offender when in fact the problem is endemic to all of China...



    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!
  • j1h15233j1h15233 Posts: 274member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by jameskatt2 View Post


    Apple is doing the adult thing to do: completely ignoring a badly behaving child.



    That's one of the dumbest things I've ever read. That's why we have so many problems in this country in the first place.



    Concerning the article, good for Apple. Why help them out if they're going to print false things about your company? When a company has more money than our government and you piss them off with bad journalism then you will deal with the consequences for that.
  • waldobushmanwaldobushman Posts: 774member
    Institutions called the Press have the historic image of informing the readership. That was never really true. They have always been the arm of one or more wealthy individuals whose morals ultimately determine the content, which determines how and if the content has any correlation with something that might be deemed Truth.



    Mark Twain once defined the difference between Man and the other animals. "Man is the only animal with the true religion -- several of them".



    You are screwed if you believe the real Truth comes from any entity, or that you can rely on one source for Truth. None are honest, competent, or knowledgable all the time, some never, and many don't care. Ultimately all are self-serving. Many readers are similarly biased, lazy, incompetent, and believe they have the source of truth without doing the homework themselves.



    But sometimes it's easy to tell bias without learning the truth. The NYT article was clearly biased, and purposefully so, because it focused exclusively on Apple, and wanted to make Apple look as bad as possible. No context, no comparison, no contrasts. The article was not journalism, it was propaganda.



    Few items that I have purchased in the past five years was not made in the Far East, and most such items were not Apple products. Working conditions for clothing, tennis shoes, various components, chemicals, food and food stuffs, construction materials are made there, and were not covered.



    An honest appraisal of working conditions requires that, as does working and environmental conditions for goods we receive from this side of the Pacific, and in our own country.



    The NYT Apple article was not part of a series looking at these issues, but a diatribe against Apple only, and therefore can and should be interpreted as the flotsam that it is and was meant to be.



    In the end, however, we still don't know the Truth.
  • lukeskymaclukeskymac Posts: 506member
    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!



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



  • iandangeriandanger Posts: 23member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Oleia View Post


    Calling ALL JOURNALIST, BLOGGERS, the media as a whole to take action and condemn such acts by Apple in trying to control the freedom of speaking and/or writing whether for or against the company. This is not about the stated article any more, this is already a form of manipulation whether directly or indirectly to withhold information which are against Apple and which the public must know.



    Apple, being the attraction and currently being in the limelight, must realize that in your current position as a "Leader" in consumer electronics garners attention and being thrust into public scrutiny is inevitable. You are not perfect and the public will surely criticize. What you should do is improve, take action, prove whats true and whats not true and not to resort to your "childish" acts towards NYTimes.



    Lets not confuse rights with privileges, the right to publish what you want is enshrined in the constitution, but the right to be invited to have a secret first look at a new OS is not. Apple can choose to punish news organizations if they want, it has no impact on freedom of speech.
  • kibitzerkibitzer Posts: 1,108member
    What an utterly useless thread this is. The animus, personal biases and mischaracterizations in these comments exponentially outweigh any of the shortcomings of Apple's China manufacturing, NYT's reporting or Apple's media relations.
  • jungmarkjungmark Posts: 6,231member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Scaramanga89 View Post


    You won't pick me for your team so I am taking my ball and going home.



    This banning of journalists from the Apple party is childish and hypocritical. You can only write about us if it's positive.



    Honestly, the CR reviews were based on evidence, HARD FACTS. If some other paper paints Apple in a negative light because they ARE ACTUALLY doing some thing wrong or have made a genuine error, then they should also be "banned." That's the general gist on here.



    If that was the case then there would be a bout two papers in the world reporting on MS. Thanks God they act more grown up.



    Apple can invite or not invite anyone they want just like you can invite/not invite anyone you want. I didn't read the article, but did the NYT get quotes from current Apple officials?



    CR reviews were based on a small minority of iphones. Remember they did recommend the iphone prior to Antenna-gate. And when VZ got the iphone4, they questioned why anyone would get it when they can wait 4 months (incorrectly) to get the "iphone5". I don't recall CR stating you can get a newer 'flagship' android device every 2-3 months so why buy Android X phone now.
  • krreagankrreagan Posts: 218member
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by Oleia View Post


    Apple, being the attraction and currently being in the limelight, must realize that in your current position as a "Leader" in consumer electronics garners attention and being thrust into public scrutiny is inevitable. You are not perfect and the public will surely criticize. What you should do is improve, take action, prove whats true and whats not true and not to resort to your "childish" acts towards NYTimes.



    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.
Sign In or Register to comment.