or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › New York Times gets Gizmodo treatment from Apple after negative reports
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New York Times gets Gizmodo treatment from Apple after negative reports - Page 2

post #41 of 185
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.

so is a BLOGGER opinion based (editoral) or journalist based?... one is, well just thoughts, and the other has protections(and rights) ... one is off-the-top-of-your-head, the other requires work.

how-a-about championing accuracy in your blog posts? (or are you going to say "it is my opinion, and it is my choice to distort the facts). or if you are going too "the truth hurts" ... well journalistic principles are well known.... SO USE THEM.

the New York Times is get burned because they are practicing BLOGGER journalism, Not Journalism, and are being treated as a BLOGGER.
post #42 of 185
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.
post #43 of 185
Apple giveth, and Apple taketh away
post #44 of 185
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
post #45 of 185
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.
post #46 of 185
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.
post #47 of 185
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.
post #48 of 185
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/
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #49 of 185
Seems the New York Times has decided to declare war on Apple. Seems an odd choice, but so be it.
post #50 of 185
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.
"That’s brilliant. I can see this annoying some people, but what doesn’t these days?" - PMZ
Reply
"That’s brilliant. I can see this annoying some people, but what doesn’t these days?" - PMZ
Reply
post #51 of 185
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.
post #52 of 185
That's what they got for pissing off their rich popular friend. Booted out of the circle.
post #53 of 185
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.
post #54 of 185
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!
post #55 of 185
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.
post #56 of 185
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.
post #57 of 185
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?

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply

iPhone 4S 64GB, Black, soon to be sold in favor of a Nokia Lumia 920
Early 2010 MacBook Pro 2.4GHz, soon to be replaced with a Retina MacBook Pro, or an Asus U500

Reply
post #58 of 185
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.
post #59 of 185
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.

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply

I admit to being a Fanatical Moderate. I Disdain the Inane. Vyizderzominymororzizazizdenderizorziz?

Reply
post #60 of 185
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.
post #61 of 185
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.
post #62 of 185
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
post #63 of 185
The New York Times does not qualify as legitimate news media. Thank you for ignoring them!!!

Peter
post #64 of 185
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!!!
post #65 of 185
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.
post #66 of 185
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.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #67 of 185
Predicatable responses. Apple is dissed and the hoards decend upon the evil offender. Add another to the fanboi hitlist! LOL
post #68 of 185
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!
post #69 of 185
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.
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #70 of 185
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
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
"Few things are harder to put up with than the annoyance of a good example" Mark Twain
"Just because something is deemed the law doesn't make it just" - SolipsismX
Reply
post #71 of 185
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.
post #72 of 185
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.
post #73 of 185
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.
post #74 of 185
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!
post #75 of 185
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).
post #76 of 185
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.
post #77 of 185
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."
post #78 of 185
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.
post #79 of 185
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.
post #80 of 185
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.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Mac OS X
AppleInsider › Forums › Software › Mac OS X › New York Times gets Gizmodo treatment from Apple after negative reports