Thanks for an intelligent and thoughtful reply. Unlike MacRumors, it's refreshing that the discussion on AppleInsider tends to be more civil and there are many fewer trollers. Perhaps with some reasonable moderation, it will be a much better place for folks who have fled the swamp of MacRumors forums.
As to your post, I don't think folks are annoyed with your 'opinion,' but rather your initial claim that the iPhone 7 had "few improvements." You've now clarified that what you meant was that it was your opinion that it didn't offer much new that was appealing for you, which is much different than the ridiculous Internet meme that DED was referring to that all it offered was a few cosmetic changes.
I still think that it only had a few improvements but I probably should have qualified that by saying “relative to previous non-S iPhones, and to most users’ expectations”. Apple have taught people to expect more from an iPhone with a new number. It looks like at least one of this year’s models will deliver on that front though, so it will be interesting to see what they call it.
The posters of these forums certainly seem more pro-Apple than most other places. I usually find myself defending Apple on other forums, but here I was on the receiving end!
Trump has brought 'fake news' into the headlines and so these failed fake reports will seem even more ridiculous and undermine their publications with every repetition.
Agree that silence is interpreted as admissions.
Better and more effective rebuttal of thes crappy attacks will serve the company
It's customers the public and the stockholders well.
Look at tabloids like the National Inquirer. How many stupid articles do they publish about celebrities? Celebrities ignore them and don't respond because responding means you took the bait and adds credibility to their garbage (why respond unless there was some truth in it, they always say). On rare occasions when they make a mistake and cross the line a celebrity will speak out or sue them, but for the most part they just keep silent.
I think TIm Cook is right by not responding to every single hit piece on Apple.
I completely disagree. The problem with your analogy is that the tabloids are not perceived as credible. The opposite is true of the "news" sites/publications that publish Apple-hate. They are perceived as credible (many of these publications also publish 'real' journalism), so lack of input from Apple is perceived as tacit acknowledgement. This is why nearly every 'normal' person I talk to has a negative perception of Apple, despite many being Apple users. On top of that, every 'normal' Apple hater I talk to (there are a lot of them out there) base their opinions on the myths perpetuated by the fake/disingenuous/click-bait 'journalism.'
I also disagree with another poster that said that answering these false journalists will invite more bad journalism. It's sad, but it's the world we live in now, as you eloquently stated in your other 'rant': they need content to get clicks. These 'journalists' are clearly not creative enough to come up with a catchy, positive story that is actually truthful, so they chose to report on the low-hanging fruit (ba-dum-tss) of bashing Apple.
And of course, this doesn't take into account the very possible, and probable situation that Apple competitors are directly or indirectly pushing Apple hate/misinformation through their 'contributions' to these 'journalists' through overt or covert advertising money (we all know samsung is a big ad spender).
I believe that Apple not refuting this deliberate misinformation is doing a HUGE disservice to the company.
Lastly, as always, a terrific article from DED. Loved it!
This was also a really enjoyable and informative thread. DED articles usually bring out a ton of trolls, so I assume there was a good amount of moderating being done. Thank you mods!
Comments
As to your post, I don't think folks are annoyed with your 'opinion,' but rather your initial claim that the iPhone 7 had "few improvements." You've now clarified that what you meant was that it was your opinion that it didn't offer much new that was appealing for you, which is much different than the ridiculous Internet meme that DED was referring to that all it offered was a few cosmetic changes.
I completely disagree. The problem with your analogy is that the tabloids are not perceived as credible. The opposite is true of the "news" sites/publications that publish Apple-hate. They are perceived as credible (many of these publications also publish 'real' journalism), so lack of input from Apple is perceived as tacit acknowledgement. This is why nearly every 'normal' person I talk to has a negative perception of Apple, despite many being Apple users. On top of that, every 'normal' Apple hater I talk to (there are a lot of them out there) base their opinions on the myths perpetuated by the fake/disingenuous/click-bait 'journalism.'
I also disagree with another poster that said that answering these false journalists will invite more bad journalism. It's sad, but it's the world we live in now, as you eloquently stated in your other 'rant': they need content to get clicks. These 'journalists' are clearly not creative enough to come up with a catchy, positive story that is actually truthful, so they chose to report on the low-hanging fruit (ba-dum-tss) of bashing Apple.
And of course, this doesn't take into account the very possible, and probable situation that Apple competitors are directly or indirectly pushing Apple hate/misinformation through their 'contributions' to these 'journalists' through overt or covert advertising money (we all know samsung is a big ad spender).
I believe that Apple not refuting this deliberate misinformation is doing a HUGE disservice to the company.
Lastly, as always, a terrific article from DED. Loved it!