Gotta say, I prefer last weeks' piece on AnandTech much more. Whole lot of facts, testing, objective opinions.
You know, journalism.
AnandTech is great for deep technical dives.
This article is, you know, an editorial.
Surely you know the difference.
They’re calling most of his stuff editorials, but they’re really not. They’re opinion pieces. Editorials are written by the editorial staff. It’s signed by the editorial staff, and represents the considered opinions of the editorial staff as the official view of the journal. These are nothing like that. They’re written by him and signed by him. The only reason we see that it’s an “editorial” is because it’s called that in the description box. Have all the editors, assuming there’s more than Mike doing this, read this, discussed this, and revised this to carefully represent the official position of the site? I’d like to know that, because his articles contain errors, sometimes a lot of errors, and sometimes just one or two. They are also more disparaging of competitors than an editorial would normally be, and often in an offensive way.
Gotta say, I prefer last weeks' piece on AnandTech much more. Whole lot of facts, testing, objective opinions.
You know, journalism.
AnandTech is great for deep technical dives.
This article is, you know, an editorial.
Surely you know the difference.
They’re calling most of his stuff editorials, but they’re really not. They’re opinion pieces. Editorials are written by the editorial staff. It’s signed by the editorial staff, and represents the considered opinions of the editorial staff as the official view of the journal. These are nothing like that. They’re written by him and signed by him. The only reason we see that it’s an “editorial” is because it’s called that in the description box. Have all the editors, assuming there’s more than Mike doing this, read this, discussed this, and revised this to carefully represent the official position of the site? I’d like to know that, because his articles contain errors, sometimes a lot of errors, and sometimes just one or two. They are also more disparaging of competitors than an editorial would normally be, and often in an offensive way.
ed·i·to·ri·al noun a newspaper article written by or on behalf of an editor that gives an opinion on a topical issue:the paper ran an editorial denouncing his hawkish stand.
Gotta say, I prefer last weeks' piece on AnandTech much more. Whole lot of facts, testing, objective opinions.
You know, journalism.
AnandTech is great for deep technical dives.
This article is, you know, an editorial.
Surely you know the difference.
They’re calling most of his stuff editorials, but they’re really not. They’re opinion pieces. Editorials are written by the editorial staff. It’s signed by the editorial staff, and represents the considered opinions of the editorial staff as the official view of the journal. These are nothing like that. They’re written by him and signed by him. The only reason we see that it’s an “editorial” is because it’s called that in the description box. Have all the editors, assuming there’s more than Mike doing this, read this, discussed this, and revised this to carefully represent the official position of the site? I’d like to know that, because his articles contain errors, sometimes a lot of errors, and sometimes just one or two. They are also more disparaging of competitors than an editorial would normally be, and often in an offensive way.
Editorials are opinion—not objective, provable fact. That’s why they’re labeled as such. They may be 100% factual or 100% “alternative facts”.
But that wasn’t really the point of my reply to OP. OP was upset this editorial wasn’t a technical analysis of the Snapdragon 855 Plus like AnandTech’s article. That complaint makes as much sense as would posting a comment on AnandTech that you’d rather have an editorial than the technical analysis they posted.
OP seemed a little confused though, since he also wanted “objective opinion”, which he went on to equate to “journalism”.
Gotta say, I prefer last weeks' piece on AnandTech much more. Whole lot of facts, testing, objective opinions.
You know, journalism.
AnandTech is great for deep technical dives.
This article is, you know, an editorial.
Surely you know the difference.
They’re calling most of his stuff editorials, but they’re really not. They’re opinion pieces. Editorials are written by the editorial staff. It’s signed by the editorial staff, and represents the considered opinions of the editorial staff as the official view of the journal. These are nothing like that. They’re written by him and signed by him. The only reason we see that it’s an “editorial” is because it’s called that in the description box. Have all the editors, assuming there’s more than Mike doing this, read this, discussed this, and revised this to carefully represent the official position of the site? I’d like to know that, because his articles contain errors, sometimes a lot of errors, and sometimes just one or two. They are also more disparaging of competitors than an editorial would normally be, and often in an offensive way.
Editorials are opinion—not objective, provable fact. That’s why they’re labeled as such. They may be 100% factual or 100% “alternative facts”.
But that wasn’t really the point of my reply to OP. OP was upset this editorial wasn’t a technical analysis of the Snapdragon 855 Plus like AnandTech’s article. That complaint makes as much sense as would posting a comment on AnandTech that you’d rather have an editorial than the technical analysis they posted.
OP seemed a little confused though, since he also wanted “objective opinion”, which he went on to equate to “journalism”.
In fairness most AI fans of DED's writing style refer to him as a journalist rather than a columnist. The latter would be more accurate but new readers would assume the former, and for legitimate reasons.
Personally I can appreciate DED's editorials for what they are. He makes no pretense of objectivity, writing to address a particular readership which is the common thread connecting most published opinion columnists. He's worked for years at crafting a persona as the penultimate Apple fan for which no apology is needed. He has a successful job, becoming extremely adept at it, and the respect he gets from Apple fans is deserved.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
You miss the po8nt.
The only point that matters is that an opinion piece, by definition of the noun, an editorial. You can wish that AI had an "editorial board" (and countless other benefits that a enormous newspapers can throw money at) and you can wish that the definition of the term be altered in your lifetime to reflex your narrow usage, but the reality is currently different from your desires.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
You miss the po8nt.
The only point that matters is that an opinion piece, by definition of the noun, an editorial. You can wish that AI had an "editorial board" (and countless other benefits that a enormous newspapers can throw money at) and you can wish that the definition of the term be altered in your lifetime to reflex your narrow usage, but the reality is currently different from your desires.
No, it is not. Opinion pieces that are just that, are caller that. Editorials are signed by the editorial staff. This is really pretty simp,e. You should understand the difference.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
You miss the po8nt.
The only point that matters is that an opinion piece, by definition of the noun, an editorial. You can wish that AI had an "editorial board" (and countless other benefits that a enormous newspapers can throw money at) and you can wish that the definition of the term be altered in your lifetime to reflex your narrow usage, but the reality is currently different from your desires.
No, it is not. Opinion pieces that are just that, are caller that. Editorials are signed by the editorial staff. This is really pretty simp,e. You should understand the difference.
It turns out that not everyone shares the same definition of a word at all times.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
You miss the po8nt.
The only point that matters is that an opinion piece, by definition of the noun, an editorial. You can wish that AI had an "editorial board" (and countless other benefits that a enormous newspapers can throw money at) and you can wish that the definition of the term be altered in your lifetime to reflex your narrow usage, but the reality is currently different from your desires.
No, it is not. Opinion pieces that are just that, are caller that. Editorials are signed by the editorial staff. This is really pretty simp,e. You should understand the difference.
What's weird is that any publication ever choose to publish unsigned editorials that were backed as "official" positions of the organization. Talk about a bunch of pussies. Even then, I bet you can't find me a single source that never allowed internal or external authors to publish editorials.
If you still need help being deprogrammed from whatever source gaslit you into thinking editors can't have opinions, here are some sources for you:
the battle of chips showcased power of verticle design vs fragmented supply chain (you can only move as fast as possible of the bottleneck within the chain... tightly related to the skillset limitation of both hardware and software engineer within the chain). Lack of control of fragmented droid system is not suitable for the high end. that is possibly why they dominated to the lower half of the market IMHO. The volume sheme in the play.
Do not under estimate microsoft. Although surface didn't catch on fire, but slowly, the window10 tablet was far better for the masses compare to the droid with mobile window office suite integrated. RCA window 10 tablet sell at around 100 USD is envy of many (with bluetooth, wifi etc. all included plus a removable keyboard). I'll keep my eyes open for window phone/tablet in 5G field (hope). Love Apple, for its design and superiority in verticle integration of hardware and software (price reflect to it all plus some-nice for my apple stock). But window is down to earth and hopefully, secure. Which droid is much too scary and iffy (in terms of design, hardware, software, including supply chain and stability). Not mention everytime you see the warning of you are in the new area with ads, its just creepy.
While everything other than straight news is opinion, which should be obvious, it’s signed “by the editorial board”. Look at both the NYTimes and the WSJ. Both have very different descriptions, but both are by the board, not one author. They are the opinion of the board, and by extension, the journal itself. A straight opinion piece is just the opinion of the author, and that is stated at the top, or bottom of the article.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
There's no legal, moral, or any other requirement within the natural laws of the universe that would make it mandatory for an opinion to go before an editorial board before it can be published. That is purely the choice of certain, large organizations.
You miss the po8nt.
The only point that matters is that an opinion piece, by definition of the noun, an editorial. You can wish that AI had an "editorial board" (and countless other benefits that a enormous newspapers can throw money at) and you can wish that the definition of the term be altered in your lifetime to reflex your narrow usage, but the reality is currently different from your desires.
No, it is not. Opinion pieces that are just that, are caller that. Editorials are signed by the editorial staff. This is really pretty simp,e. You should understand the difference.
What's weird is that any publication ever choose to publish unsigned editorials that were backed as "official" positions of the organization. Talk about a bunch of pussies. Even then, I bet you can't find me a single source that never allowed internal or external authors to publish editorials.
If you still need help being deprogrammed from whatever source gaslit you into thinking editors can't have opinions, here are some sources for you:
You continue to miss the point. I didn’t say that editors can’t, or don’t, have an opinion. Everybody has an opinion. But the difference is that the journal, as a whole takes responsibility for an editorial. It’s stated as such. It speakers as an official opinion of the journal, not just one editor, normally. On the very rare occasion where it is written by one editor, it’s almost always the editor in chief who writes it for the board, which then states it as the opinion of the board. Even more rarely, the board will select different editors to write the editorial, which again states it’s the opinion of the board.
at rhe very least, I’d like to see that here. Ok, so let DED write an editorial, but then express that this is the official opinion of the board. Unless that’s done, it’s just an individual,opinion piece, which journals also have, which is usually published under the OpEd section, not the editorial section.
the battle of chips showcased power of verticle design vs fragmented supply chain (you can only move as fast as possible of the bottleneck within the chain... tightly related to the skillset limitation of both hardware and software engineer within the chain). Lack of control of fragmented droid system is not suitable for the high end. that is possibly why they dominated to the lower half of the market IMHO. The volume sheme in the play.
Do not under estimate microsoft. Although surface didn't catch on fire, but slowly, the window10 tablet was far better for the masses compare to the droid with mobile window office suite integrated. RCA window 10 tablet sell at around 100 USD is envy of many (with bluetooth, wifi etc. all included plus a removable keyboard). I'll keep my eyes open for window phone/tablet in 5G field (hope). Love Apple, for its design and superiority in verticle integration of hardware and software (price reflect to it all plus some-nice for my apple stock). But window is down to earth and hopefully, secure. Which droid is much too scary and iffy (in terms of design, hardware, software, including supply chain and stability). Not mention everytime you see the warning of you are in the new area with ads, its just creepy.
Well,m business are not flicking to Windows tablets because of the high maintenance requirements. It’s why iPads have done so well in businesses, particularly for field use. Windows tablets are bought by IT departments more than any other segment.
Comments
AnandTech is great for deep technical dives.
This article is, you know, an editorial.
noun
a newspaper article written by or on behalf of an editor that gives an opinion on a topical issue: the paper ran an editorial denouncing his hawkish stand.
Personally I can appreciate DED's editorials for what they are. He makes no pretense of objectivity, writing to address a particular readership which is the common thread connecting most published opinion columnists. He's worked for years at crafting a persona as the penultimate Apple fan for which no apology is needed. He has a successful job, becoming extremely adept at it, and the respect he gets from Apple fans is deserved.
thats why it’s so confusing here. These are very obviously no more than opinion pieces, even though they’re called editorials.
If you still need help being deprogrammed from whatever source gaslit you into thinking editors can't have opinions, here are some sources for you:
Do not under estimate microsoft. Although surface didn't catch on fire, but slowly, the window10 tablet was far better for the masses compare to the droid with mobile window office suite integrated. RCA window 10 tablet sell at around 100 USD is envy of many (with bluetooth, wifi etc. all included plus a removable keyboard). I'll keep my eyes open for window phone/tablet in 5G field (hope). Love Apple, for its design and superiority in verticle integration of hardware and software (price reflect to it all plus some-nice for my apple stock). But window is down to earth and hopefully, secure. Which droid is much too scary and iffy (in terms of design, hardware, software, including supply chain and stability). Not mention everytime you see the warning of you are in the new area with ads, its just creepy.
at rhe very least, I’d like to see that here. Ok, so let DED write an editorial, but then express that this is the official opinion of the board. Unless that’s done, it’s just an individual,opinion piece, which journals also have, which is usually published under the OpEd section, not the editorial section.
Well,m business are not flicking to Windows tablets because of the high maintenance requirements. It’s why iPads have done so well in businesses, particularly for field use. Windows tablets are bought by IT departments more than any other segment.