New York Times gets Gizmodo treatment from Apple after negative reports - Page 5

Oh, so "NOW" (as you say) this is an issue that matters. But in the days before Apple was "#1", foxconn workers could just go f@#k themselves?
You are really confused or a hypocrite.
This condition has always been there, long before Apple was anything at all. It's always been there. THAT is the real story. (That, and the fact that Apple is "one of the better ones" on this issue just as you say ) But that is not what is being reported.
The people working for Microsoft (foxconn) threatened suicide if working conditions did not improve for them. How is this not the front page newws on this issue?

Because no one cares about what Microsoft does. And that's the only reason.

And you should read the biography, for starters.

Part 2.:

See palomine, quoted beow.

No, it doesn't. Unless the only thing you've been saying all along is that Apple doesn't want to invite the NYT to a press conference. Any other conclusion is speculative at best.


It's called marketing. What motivation would Apple (or any company, for that matter) have to invite a media outlet to a private press conference, if they didn't think it would be positive for them?


What "heavy stick" is that? Being invited to a press conference? What value is that to an objective journalistic outlet?


Explain.


Proof? If none is required, then I assert you are in denial.



Non-sequitir.


"Antenna Gate" - Loved the headline, no media hype there. Ignoring for a moment the fact that it was blown out of proportion by the "journalists", explain what so many of the 'affected' devices continue to work, error free (and without the bumper) despite this supposed fatal design flaw?

"iP4 design release" - How is this relevant to your argument in the least? A "journalist" knowingly took possession of stolen goods, and leaked industrial secrets. If anything it supports and gives legitimacy to Apple's stance on not engaging media when they believe the results may be unfavorable.

"workplace issues" - The biggest issue here is that Apple is being singled out by name in a patently sensationalist manner by the supposed "journalists". Again, supporting Apples selective invitations when dealing with the media.


Of course not, it's called public relations.


A move that was more public relations than anything else. A prudent choice frankly.


A necessary self-defense against unscrupulous "journalists". This does not support you position.


What increase? The only increase has been in the "reporting" on this. There hasn't been any significant change in behavior on Apple's part.


That conclusion is not logically supported by your statements.


On what basis can you make this claim?


Failure to report factual information in a fair an unbiased manner.


No, see above.


Not in all cases, no.


Debatable, and again not in all cases.


Irrelevant. This doesn't even apply as a metaphor.


You claim to see the problem. Why haven't you fixed it?


Incorrect and irrelevant.


A novel ideal espoused by armchair activists. Unfortunately not practical when social, cultural, political and legal imperatives are at odds in disparate countries.

That's the wordmindful. I'm not 100 percent serious about the Zen thing, but I am about how mindfulnness of the customer and, deeply, mindful products and sourcing got into Apple's DNA. I'm trying to find an arresting way to show how Apple is post-corporate as far as ethics and level of exploitation goes.

How did this consciousness get into Apple's missionin contrast to the average tech company?
I can only say here that it's in the biography, and it has to do with Job's favorite book in his tripping days, both inner tripping and outer, to India. That would be Ram Dass's Be Here Now.

And IMO a true picture of Zen would see no inherent contradiction between business and philosophy, as long as the business aimed at enlightenment.

Last I checked, David Pogue worked for the NY Times. And I got most of my early info about Mountain Lion from Pogue's article posted early Thursday. So this A.I. article is demonstrably untrue.

Pogue has something of a special status with Apple. HE, singularly, received Mountain Lion.

I don't recall Pogue saying he was one of the tech reviewers or describing the situation leading up to the special preview including but not limited to talking with Schiller. Plus his artcile came out quite a bit after other bloggers that were given a sneak peak.

Well looks like the NY Times is on to something. i guess Apple has more to hide than they let on. Fox conn is the tip of the iceberg.

and as the Germans said "we were only baking bread in the ovens"

"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."

it's because Apple is the biggest manufacture now. Dell and HP were in china first taking advantage of the slave labor that was already there. Apple just joined the party in the race to the bottom that stated in 2001. Apple is not the forward thinking company it was in the 80s now its just another greedy Corp trying to make money anyway they know how. if its down and dirty they will go there. just ask any of the independent resellers Apples is shutting down every month.
and if you think Apple making PR over joining the Fair Labor Association seems like they doing something positive. Check out who funds the Fair Labor association. Every US company that wants to look good, kind of a conflict of interest. Its a sham. There is so much more to this story. its fun to watch greedy companies get their comeuppance.

So Apple is evil and no matter what they do they are wrong and everyone else is right. Got it!

Well, there you go: Chinese manufacturing is much like the holocaust, in that bees! In my head! Millions of bees!

I guess, but it's even funner to listen to complete lunatics rant on the internet.

...being fed by DED, no less.

Cretin's Law
The faster and larger an online discussion grows, the probability of a civilized conversation based on the original topic approaches 0. (Check out Digg.com for examples of Cretin's Law)

And with that single line, you guarantee that nothing you have said or will say can be taken in a serious light.

lol, bravo

What a dumb comment.

What a brillant response¡ Care to clarify what is so dumb about my joke. I can see how you might not find it funny, but dumb?

I realize some people have some kind of reflexive distaste for the guy, but Gruber points out something kind of obvious that I don't think has been mentioned: Apple has a history of granting exclusive scoops to the WSJ.


Right? Don't recall anyone talking about how Apple was "punishing" the NYT when the WSJ got the big story on Steve's liver transplant.

But, amazingly, all it takes is one guy's opinion, an opinion that takes no mind of an established precedent and runs with a stock Post Hoc fallacy (because the Times was mean to Apple, an exclusive granted to the Wall Street Journal must be punishment) and we have a bunch of people going crazy with the "Apple is a big bully, a baby, they've jumped the shark, they're out of control, etc." nonsense.

Worse, Gruber goes on to note that Henry Blodget just made up some shit about how David Pogue, even thought he actually got a preview copy of ML, probably didn't you know, get a face to fact sit down like the Apple sycophants because, you know, you've got to figure that's how Apple rolls, on account of..... you know....... except it didn't happen that way:


And so we get all these jackasses constantly claiming that the "fan boys" will excuse anything Apple does, while simultaneously getting completely hysterical over any random bit of web rumor, no matter how thinly sourced or easily refutable. You guys are awesome, really. Good job.

Yeah, too bad, if it wasn't a complete bunch of BS. The above story didn't happen. Apple gave David Pogue a private session, same as Gruber et al.

http://daringfireball.net/linked/201...to-conclusions

It's a pity everyone attacking Apple over this (or cheering them on!) is behaving so poorly, their childish ignorant insults really detracts from, you know, reality.

Daniel, are you planning to issue a retraction, or just an update, since the entire story is bogus. NY Times' David Pogue did get a private session with Apple execs about Mountain Lion.

http://daringfireball.net/linked/201...to-conclusions

Which is it: retraction or update?

Well, in fairness to Daniel, we might observe that he was working off some bait thrown in the water by Erik Wemple of The Washington Post. I don't blame him that much for getting sucked in. I'm a bit pissed at the NY Times myself.

No italics for them, that'll show 'em.

Are you seriously comparing criticism of your favourite tech company to racial discrimination? Seriously?

And that "but" has come about because of the mentality on AI that anybody who is critical of Apple must not be a user. So now anybody about to post anything critical has to categorically state they are a user.

But what more can you expect when you have people who actually think criticism of a tech company is comparable to real and genuine issues millions of human beings face everyday.