Apple will put forth some excellent product that we just can't wait to buy, while the media clamors to predict Apple's doom because they did not release x-y-x product/feature.
The two conflicting interests of Appleinsider that are behind the term "Conflict of interest" are:
1) The interest to write a decent article (or to write an article that makes people come back to Appleinsider).
2) The interest to earn money by inserting somewhat off-topic or rather not relevant promotional text.
Readers normally assume that all information in an article is reasonably relevant because they assume that it is in Appleinsider's interest to write articles that way. But if the reader does not know about interest (2) they will Appleinsider give some leeway and believe them to some degree that right now it is important to talk about Gazelle. That is why such declaration of conflict of interest is generally considered to be necessary, to avoid that readers are deceived about the motives behind an article or part of it.
This here is naturally only a small issue as the deceiving didn't last very long anyway (ie, we have realised after only a small number of articles that the mentioning of Gazelle in every article about the release of a new Apple product was not happening because it was important and relevant in every article).
The two conflicting interests of Appleinsider that are behind the term "Conflict of interest" are:
1) The interest to write a decent article (or to write an article that makes people come back to Appleinsider).
2) The interest to earn money by inserting somewhat off-topic or rather not relevant promotional text.
Readers normally assume that all information in an article is reasonably relevant because they assume that it is in Appleinsider's interest to write articles that way. But if the reader does not know about interest (2) they will Appleinsider give some leeway and believe them to some degree that right now it is important to talk about Gazelle. That is why such declaration of conflict of interest is generally considered to be necessary, to avoid that readers are deceived about the motives behind an article or part of it.
This here is naturally only a small issue as the deceiving didn't last very long anyway (ie, we have realised after only a small number of articles that the mentioning of Gazelle in every article about the release of a new Apple product was not happening because it was important and relevant in every article).
You are confusing full disclosure with conflict of interest.
AI has no conflicting interest in writing an article and inserting an affiliate link where applicable. A conflict of interest would be speaking ill of selling your iPad early while having said link within the article. As anyone would do showcasing an item and linking to their Amazon affiliate account.
Or
If someone having power/position uses said power/position to promote an entity that benefits them, yes, that could be conflicting interest. But I don't think AI is using their position as journalist to promote, rather, they are simply inserting an affiliate link. If, however, they were to say company X is better than company Z and they are getting paid by company X, then yes, a conflict has been made.
This is the usual time to update the iPod line. It may only be a few small changes, more memory, new colors, etc. But it would seem likely there would be a refresh for the Christmas season.
You are confusing full disclosure with conflict of interest.
AI has no conflicting interest in writing an article and inserting an affiliate link where applicable. A conflict of interest would be speaking ill of selling your iPad early while having said link within the article. As anyone would do showcasing an item and linking to their Amazon affiliate account.
Or
If someone having power/position uses said power/position to promote an entity that benefits them, yes, that could be conflicting interest. But I don't think AI is using their position as journalist to promote, rather, they are simply inserting an affiliate link. If, however, they were to say company X is better than company Z and they are getting paid by company X, then yes, a conflict has been made.
Full disclosure is there to expose any potential conflicts of interest. 'Full disclosure' is an activity (or the result of that activity) and a 'conflict of interest' is a situation of conflicting motivations. There is nothing to confuse here.
Conflict of interest means there are two conflicting interests (which I had shown an example of). Which is also the case in your example, the interest to gain affiliate fees vs. the interest to write bad about the iPad (except that you failed to actually identify why writing bad about the iPad would be in your interest, though the most obvious would be because the iPad is bad but maybe your interest could also be in trashing things for the sake of thrashing).
Well, if they insert an affiliate link to an unrelated product, eg, a toaster, into an article about Apple products, it is not just 'inserting an affiliate link', it is diverting the reader's attention towards a product category (and a specific product) and that is the offence.
For what ever reason; there is showing up reports that the iPad Mini Retina will not be one of the iPad Mini 2 for 2013. Many pundits now talk of an slightly upgraded iPad Mini 2 with same resolution and an A5X processor upgrade - not even an A6! This is completely understandable for the replacement of the iPad Mini which has only an old three year A5 inside it. But no Retina display until second quarter 2014!
I just hope this is a lie about the retina iPad Mini!
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Thanks for your angry, negative comment in AI, Mr "1 Post".
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Great.
Now you have so thoroughly talked about your imagination, you may go now...and maybe see the real world.
Mavericks and Mac Pro (the latter long time in coming...) So I'm looking forward to both of those. And some sane pricing for the entry model (and I say that as a top end BTO iMac owner...)
4k 'Cinema' display?
and ofc.
The new 'Pads are going to be impressive with the Rogue and A7 chipset. An A7X chipset should kick booty in the iPad 5 (New New...)
I have a 3rd Gen iPad and a A7X Rogue iPad 5 will blow the doors off it. For me, the iPad isn't quite big enough for want I want to do.
Wonder if we'll get a 12 inch plus iPad to add to the range?
I've been more impressed with Cook's performances each time he walks out onto the 'Apple Faithful' stage. I think he's doing a good job overall.
There's about 3 inches between the mini and the main iPad. Why not another 3 inches. Another two...is ok. But another 3 really is a marker of intent. 8 to 10 to 13 inches. That covers plenty of ground there. IN a recent MacDailyNews poll, nearly 25% of people wanted an iPad with a screen size of 12-17 inches. While I'd love one of 17 inches...a 13 inch model would be sweet for artists, musicians and even begins to make a great little desktop come laptop.
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Thank you, drive-by trollers, for continuing to affirm that I am not the most pathetic and worthless person on the face of the Earth.
Full disclosure is there to expose any potential conflicts of interest. 'Full disclosure' is an activity (or the result of that activity) and a 'conflict of interest' is a situation of conflicting motivations. There is nothing to confuse here.
Conflict of interest means there are two conflicting interests (which I had shown an example of). Which is also the case in your example, the interest to gain affiliate fees vs. the interest to write bad about the iPad (except that you failed to actually identify why writing bad about the iPad would be in your interest, though the most obvious would be because the iPad is bad but maybe your interest could also be in trashing things for the sake of thrashing).
Well, if they insert an affiliate link to an unrelated product, eg, a toaster, into an article about Apple products, it is not just 'inserting an affiliate link', it is diverting the reader's attention towards a product category (and a specific product) and that is the offence.
I 100% disagree. The article was about iPads and the link was about selling your iPad. There is no conflict in producing the article by means of not including valuable information, or tainting information in favor of a product/service. The article was not biased based on the link whatsoever. The two did not conflict on the other.
Now, if this was a review of places to sell your used iPad and AI rated the affiliated company 5 Stars and included a link without disclosing, there would be a conflict- a completing agenda. Unbiased review and affiliation.
There is no conflict, no competing agenda, and no bias skewed towards or against the affiliate or the article.
I guess an A6 or A7 chip combined with 802.11ac could offer the potential for faster performance, but other than that I can't see much reason.
I'd be happier to first get an Airport Express with 802.11ac. I've been under the assumption that they've held that back to drive sales of Time Capsule/Airport Extreme. At $99 it would be a very affordable AC base station.
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Comments
It sounds like their interests line up nicely.
I predict:
Apple will put forth some excellent product that we just can't wait to buy, while the media clamors to predict Apple's doom because they did not release x-y-x product/feature.
It sounds like their interests line up nicely.
I thought so lol
It sounds like their interests line up nicely.
The two conflicting interests of Appleinsider that are behind the term "Conflict of interest" are:
1) The interest to write a decent article (or to write an article that makes people come back to Appleinsider).
2) The interest to earn money by inserting somewhat off-topic or rather not relevant promotional text.
Readers normally assume that all information in an article is reasonably relevant because they assume that it is in Appleinsider's interest to write articles that way. But if the reader does not know about interest (2) they will Appleinsider give some leeway and believe them to some degree that right now it is important to talk about Gazelle. That is why such declaration of conflict of interest is generally considered to be necessary, to avoid that readers are deceived about the motives behind an article or part of it.
This here is naturally only a small issue as the deceiving didn't last very long anyway (ie, we have realised after only a small number of articles that the mentioning of Gazelle in every article about the release of a new Apple product was not happening because it was important and relevant in every article).
The two conflicting interests of Appleinsider that are behind the term "Conflict of interest" are:
1) The interest to write a decent article (or to write an article that makes people come back to Appleinsider).
2) The interest to earn money by inserting somewhat off-topic or rather not relevant promotional text.
Readers normally assume that all information in an article is reasonably relevant because they assume that it is in Appleinsider's interest to write articles that way. But if the reader does not know about interest (2) they will Appleinsider give some leeway and believe them to some degree that right now it is important to talk about Gazelle. That is why such declaration of conflict of interest is generally considered to be necessary, to avoid that readers are deceived about the motives behind an article or part of it.
This here is naturally only a small issue as the deceiving didn't last very long anyway (ie, we have realised after only a small number of articles that the mentioning of Gazelle in every article about the release of a new Apple product was not happening because it was important and relevant in every article).
You are confusing full disclosure with conflict of interest.
AI has no conflicting interest in writing an article and inserting an affiliate link where applicable. A conflict of interest would be speaking ill of selling your iPad early while having said link within the article. As anyone would do showcasing an item and linking to their Amazon affiliate account.
Or
If someone having power/position uses said power/position to promote an entity that benefits them, yes, that could be conflicting interest. But I don't think AI is using their position as journalist to promote, rather, they are simply inserting an affiliate link. If, however, they were to say company X is better than company Z and they are getting paid by company X, then yes, a conflict has been made.
It may only be a few small changes, more memory,
new colors, etc. But it would seem likely there
would be a refresh for the Christmas season.
You are confusing full disclosure with conflict of interest.
AI has no conflicting interest in writing an article and inserting an affiliate link where applicable. A conflict of interest would be speaking ill of selling your iPad early while having said link within the article. As anyone would do showcasing an item and linking to their Amazon affiliate account.
Or
If someone having power/position uses said power/position to promote an entity that benefits them, yes, that could be conflicting interest. But I don't think AI is using their position as journalist to promote, rather, they are simply inserting an affiliate link. If, however, they were to say company X is better than company Z and they are getting paid by company X, then yes, a conflict has been made.
Full disclosure is there to expose any potential conflicts of interest. 'Full disclosure' is an activity (or the result of that activity) and a 'conflict of interest' is a situation of conflicting motivations. There is nothing to confuse here.
Conflict of interest means there are two conflicting interests (which I had shown an example of). Which is also the case in your example, the interest to gain affiliate fees vs. the interest to write bad about the iPad (except that you failed to actually identify why writing bad about the iPad would be in your interest, though the most obvious would be because the iPad is bad but maybe your interest could also be in trashing things for the sake of thrashing).
Well, if they insert an affiliate link to an unrelated product, eg, a toaster, into an article about Apple products, it is not just 'inserting an affiliate link', it is diverting the reader's attention towards a product category (and a specific product) and that is the offence.
I just hope this is a lie about the retina iPad Mini!
I am expecting a larger screen iPad, based on Apple "having a lot to cover."
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Thanks for your angry, negative comment in AI, Mr "1 Post".
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
Great.
Now you have so thoroughly talked about your imagination, you may go now...and maybe see the real world.
Mavericks and Mac Pro (the latter long time in coming...) So I'm looking forward to both of those. And some sane pricing for the entry model (and I say that as a top end BTO iMac owner...)
4k 'Cinema' display?
and ofc.
The new 'Pads are going to be impressive with the Rogue and A7 chipset. An A7X chipset should kick booty in the iPad 5 (New New...)
I have a 3rd Gen iPad and a A7X Rogue iPad 5 will blow the doors off it. For me, the iPad isn't quite big enough for want I want to do.
Wonder if we'll get a 12 inch plus iPad to add to the range?
I've been more impressed with Cook's performances each time he walks out onto the 'Apple Faithful' stage. I think he's doing a good job overall.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Great.
Now you have so thoroughly talked about your imagination, you may go now...and maybe see the real world.
People used to moan about OS X and how it looked or the lack of teh 'snappy.'
Now OS X is a work of art.
iOS 7 is just the beginning of where maybe OS 'Ten' passes the batton.
There was an Apple II. Then the Mac. Now we have iOS7. They'll refine it in time...wonder what it will look like after another 'ten' cats?
Lemon Bon Bon.
I am expecting a larger screen iPad, based on Apple "having a lot to cover."
I think that's a reasonable guess based upon a clue in the invite, ascii.
Why not have the Macbook Pro's 13 inch Retina screen? Give it to the Air as well.
And you have one screen to share production costs?
Love to have a 13 inch iPad...
Lemon Bon Bon.
There's about 3 inches between the mini and the main iPad. Why not another 3 inches. Another two...is ok. But another 3 really is a marker of intent. 8 to 10 to 13 inches. That covers plenty of ground there. IN a recent MacDailyNews poll, nearly 25% of people wanted an iPad with a screen size of 12-17 inches. While I'd love one of 17 inches...a 13 inch model would be sweet for artists, musicians and even begins to make a great little desktop come laptop.
Something for everybody that way.
Lemon Bon Bon.
Thank you, drive-by trollers, for continuing to affirm that I am not the most pathetic and worthless person on the face of the Earth.
Full disclosure is there to expose any potential conflicts of interest. 'Full disclosure' is an activity (or the result of that activity) and a 'conflict of interest' is a situation of conflicting motivations. There is nothing to confuse here.
Conflict of interest means there are two conflicting interests (which I had shown an example of). Which is also the case in your example, the interest to gain affiliate fees vs. the interest to write bad about the iPad (except that you failed to actually identify why writing bad about the iPad would be in your interest, though the most obvious would be because the iPad is bad but maybe your interest could also be in trashing things for the sake of thrashing).
Well, if they insert an affiliate link to an unrelated product, eg, a toaster, into an article about Apple products, it is not just 'inserting an affiliate link', it is diverting the reader's attention towards a product category (and a specific product) and that is the offence.
I 100% disagree. The article was about iPads and the link was about selling your iPad. There is no conflict in producing the article by means of not including valuable information, or tainting information in favor of a product/service. The article was not biased based on the link whatsoever. The two did not conflict on the other.
Now, if this was a review of places to sell your used iPad and AI rated the affiliated company 5 Stars and included a link without disclosing, there would be a conflict- a completing agenda. Unbiased review and affiliation.
There is no conflict, no competing agenda, and no bias skewed towards or against the affiliate or the article.
AppleTV hardware really doesn't need an update.
I guess an A6 or A7 chip combined with 802.11ac could offer the potential for faster performance, but other than that I can't see much reason.
I'd be happier to first get an Airport Express with 802.11ac. I've been under the assumption that they've held that back to drive sales of Time Capsule/Airport Extreme. At $99 it would be a very affordable AC base station.
Who cares about these new products? They still have the crap IOS 7 on them. And you would have to be a moron to double down and download Mavericks on your computer. Apple has a major issue that they have to solve now. They have lost credibility with their customers, because of Maps, and IOS 7.
LOL.
Ok.