This editorial is one of the best ones I’ve read in a long time. I recommend reading the whole thing if you have time.
So many big tech websites have this angle they use when discussing Apple. It’s like they’re waiting for them to fail, and it’s as if every move Apple makes comes with a side-story, instead of focusing on the actual products they’re releasing.
These four paragraphs (which weren’t written directly underneath each other, but share the same theme as the previous ones, so I pulled them together to help the narrative) sum up how I feel.
With all that was announced at the iPhone 7 event, from the A10 Fusion chip, to the brand-new non-physical pressure-sensitive home button, there should be so much to talk about—but instead all I keep hearing about is how it looks the same as last year’s, and how there’s no more headphone jack. Sure, it looks the same, but nearly everything has changed about this phone.
I could rant on this all day, but Daniel Dilger sums it up much better than I ever could:
The quality of the media coverage following this week’s Apple Event raises the question: are journalists operating under the assumption that their audience is universally stupid or are they just borderline basic themselves? Why doesn’t the tech media seek to clearly journal events rather than writing dramatic narratives of comedy and tragedy?
After sitting through the entire Keynote, you’d think journalists would have a lot to talk about, without any need to contrive a positive or negative slant.
That, really, is a core issue in the tech media, which seems to see itself as a check to Apple’s market power in leveraging a populist veto arbitrarily dictated as what the people need. What journalists should be doing–rather than seeking to influence outcomes–is to inform readers of the subjects that are of importance to them. It’s buyers that influence outcomes via the market.
The market seems to be working quite well without journalists erecting a propaganda smokescreen to empower them to act as the all powerful Supreme Soviet dictating how and what Apple can and should be doing. If journalists can embrace their role of asking smart questions–even tough, critical ones–and better informing their readers, the rest of us can vote with our dollars and get what we want.
The membership is yearly contribution to support all things created on nashp.com. There’s no pressure to join. If you feel like I’ve brought you enough value, then join. Otherwise, I’ll keep working.