Apple reportedly punishes German mag for its iPhone 6 Plus bend test

[Admire]

Without bashing Apple, we can all agree that the banning of media you feel aren't as supportive of you as you like, is not something that should be supported.

 

This applies to everybody. Not Just apple.

[Trik'Stari]

Without bashing Apple, we can all agree that the banning of media you feel aren't as supportive of you as you like, is not something that should be supported.

 

This applies to everybody. Not Just apple.

Completely 100% agreed, and I despise apple.

 

Why not just ask "well what do you think we could have done better?" oh wait, because they wouldn't take advice from anyone not working for them, ever.

 

Except maybe if it was a few million customers telling it to them

[Admire]

Completely 100% agreed, and I despise apple.

 

Why not just ask "well what do you think we could have done better?" oh wait, because they wouldn't take advice from anyone not working for them, ever.

 

Except maybe if it was a few million customers telling it to them

Twice in one day. This is getting scary.

[Builder]

I honestly don't see the problem you guys have with this. (of course HE would say that! He's an Apple APOLOGIST!) The whole bending schtick is patently not a problem, so as a magazine, when you go out of your way to try and show that it is, (i.e., buy a whole other phone and make ONE MORE VIDEO of you bending the crap out of it with your hands) I think any company would be mad. 

 

Yes, we get it. You can fucking bend it with your hands. You can snap a Galaxy S4 in half with your hands. This isn't the first smartphone to be bendable by hand and it won't be the last. One more video added to the pile does nothing for upholding your "journalistic integrity." I'd totally understand everyone here's position if they said they were concerned by reports of it bending, but to go out of your way to show that it does yet again when the same thing has been done and overdone is just silly and frankly immature. Of course they're going to say they were excited to get the invitation. Of course they're going to say they were excited about the product and wanted it to be good. Why? Because if they said the opposite was true, then this test would fail to uphold yet another tenet of scientific integrity: confirmation bias.

 

These tests are so far from objective as to be silly. Consumer Reports is the only publication that's even tried. If you think their methodology is flawed, then do a better test. These are not better. They're worse. Consumer Reports has done the best test so far and it's shown it not to be a problem. Until someone does a test that is clearly more accurate then Consumer Reports is the best we have to go on.

 

The fact that I even have to tell you people that you shouldn't trust a few guys on the other side of the internet over primarily scientific publications that literally exist for the pure benefit of the consumer concerns me greatly, but it doesn't surprise me.

[Admire]

I honestly don't see the problem you guys have with this. (of course HE would say that! He's an Apple APOLOGIST!) The whole bending schtick is patently not a problem, so as a magazine, when you go out of your way to try and show that it is, (i.e., buy a whole other phone and make ONE MORE VIDEO of you bending the crap out of it with your hands) I think any company would be mad. 

 

Yes, we get it. You can fucking bend it with your hands. You can snap a Galaxy S4 in half with your hands. This isn't the first smartphone to be bendable by hand and it won't be the last. One more video added to the pile does nothing for upholding your "journalistic integrity." I'd totally understand everyone here's position if they said they were concerned by reports of it bending, but to go out of your way to show that it does yet again when the same thing has been done and overdone is just silly and frankly immature. Of course they're going to say they were excited to get the invitation. Of course they're going to say they were excited about the product and wanted it to be good. Why? Because if they said the opposite was true, then this test would fail to uphold yet another tenet of scientific integrity: confirmation bias.

 

These tests are so far from objective as to be silly. Consumer Reports is the only publication that's even tried. If you think their methodology is flawed, then do a better test. These are not better. They're worse. Consumer Reports has done the best test so far and it's shown it not to be a problem. Until someone does a test that is clearly more accurate then Consumer Reports is the best we have to go on.

 

The fact that I even have to tell you people that you shouldn't trust a few guys on the other side of the internet over primarily scientific publications that literally exist for the pure benefit of the consumer concerns me greatly, but it doesn't surprise me.

 

Apple uses a tactic that will scare anybody else from actually writing something negative about any future iphone reviews because this exact same thing might happen....And you justification for this is that "The whole bending schtick is patently not a problem"...:

 

So if any company believes that the thing that people are complaining over isn't a problem, then you can just ban them....That would be the case most of the times.

 

I don't think the whole bending thing is a big deal, but banning a magazine for this certaintly is. Its weak, and its an attempt to control the medias that cover them.

 

Most people in here were going crazy about the gaming industrys chummy relationship with developers, but this is okay? bs. This is intimidation. Pure and simple.

[Builder]

Apple uses a tactic that will scare anybody else from actually writing something negative about any future iphone reviews because this exact same thing might happen....And you justification for this is that "The whole bending schtick is patently not a problem"...

But it's so clearly not a problem to everyone not involved in a PC MASTER RACE! type forum or who is not specifically an Apple hater doesn't even care about it. There were more people in the Apple store I went to last night talking about how silly a hoax it was, (because it's basically that at this point) than there were folks actually concerned about it.

 

There's a difference between being negative and this. This is pointlessly negative. It's essentially drawing a conclusion from an incomplete set of data and calling the conclusion conclusive. The subject is so overdone that it's now burnt to a crisp. Nobody wants to hear about it anymore. Nobody needs to hear about it anymore.

 

Apple doesn't have an obligation to invite journalists to their event that have essentially went out of their way to convince people that their product has a serious flaw that it realistically doesn't. Simple as that.

[Admire]

But it's so clearly not a problem to everyone not involved in a PC MASTER RACE! type forum or who is not specifically an Apple hater doesn't even care about it. There were more people in the Apple store I went to last night talking about how silly a hoax it was, (because it's basically that at this point) than there were folks actually concerned about it.

 

There's a difference between being negative and this. This is pointlessly negative. It's essentially drawing a conclusion from an incomplete set of data and calling the conclusion conclusive. The subject is so overdone that it's now burnt to a crisp. Nobody wants to hear about it anymore. Nobody needs to hear about it anymore.

 

Apple doesn't have an obligation to invite journalists to their event that have essentially went out of their way to convince people that their product has a serious flaw that it realistically doesn't. Simple as that.

 

If I don't think its a problem, would that disqualify me as being part of that race because I really like feeling superior?

 

Read the last part of what I wrote. This isn't about whether or not this is a problem! This is about apple picking and choosing, and how that influences other magasines, websites, tv channels, newspapers etc etc etc.

 

There are ALWAYS tons of shit in reviews that is unfair, untrue or that only happened to that test device that they were testing, but I want honesty in reviewers and apple punishing people like this is pathetic and smallminded.

 

Other reviewers will think twice about mentioning a controversy involving apple in the future, because what if it turns out not to be serious.....What about Antennagate(I hate the gate thing too but what can we do)...That was an actual issue. It might have been an issue on other phones too, but it was especially a problem with that specific iphone. I would think it would be unfair if apple banned reviewers if they warned their readers that they should be carefull with how they held the phone.

 

You say that apple doesn't have an obligation to invite people...and you are correct. But this is not what happened here. Apple called them, making sure that they knew that they were banned in the future. That is retaliation, no matter how you spin it.

[Builder]

You say that apple doesn't have an obligation to invite people...and you are correct. But this is not what happened here. Apple called them, making sure that they knew that they were banned in the future. That is retaliation, no matter how you spin it.

Of course it's retaliation. I'm not trying to spin it. I'm of the opinion they have the right to retaliate here for reasons I've expressed previously.

[Admire]

Of course it's retaliation. I'm not trying to spin it. I'm of the opinion they have the right to retaliate here for reasons I've expressed previously.

 

But there has to be a line right? I get that apple has the right to invite who they want...but what's the line that has to be crossed in order for it to be okay to ban them in your opinion? We aren't talking legally, just what you think.

 

What did computerbild do that was so bad and where is the line?

[Builder]

But there has to be a line right? I get that apple has the right to invite who they want...but what's the line that has to be crossed in order for it to be okay to ban them in your opinion? We aren't talking legally, just what you think.

Of course there has to be a line. The first part of your argument unfortunately amounts to a paraphrasing of the slippery slope but the second part I can try to tackle.

 

It's less a question of why was it wrong than why did they do it in the first place? Were they seriously exposing more people to this incident? Or just perpetuating the idea that it even is an incident? They say they have 200,000 views as if that's impressive. The Unbox Therapy one has over 48 MILLION. It was pointless for them to make another video of a pseudo-problem when more popular ones already exist. If you can figure out why they did it god on you. What I see is a magazine that went too far in their subtle slander of Apple and now regret their decision. If you see something else I'm waiting to here what it is.

[mr moose]

What if computerbild had bought a phone, bent it, then reported that the force required to bend it was not less than the force required to bend other phones and thus people should just treat it like any phone and be careful. would Apple still have banned them from receiving samples and invites? 

 

If the answer is yes, then one can only assume apple is tired of publicity on bending phones be it a genuine issue or not. If the answer is no then it was clearly a move to try and control the media from unfavorable reporting (be it genuine or not).

 

The fact is there is not enough information to claim the ban is ethical, you can claim it is their right, that they can do what ever they want, but to claim it was ethical in any way is to ignore the information we have.

[Builder]

What if computerbild had bought a phone, bent it, then reported that the force required to bend it was not less than the force required to bend other phones and thus people should just treat it like any phone and be careful. would Apple still have banned them from receiving samples and invites? 

No, because Consumer Reports already did that. Computerbild just rehashed the already tired hand-bending test videos that are completely unscientific and don't add anything to the discussion. If there had been any inkling of science in their test this wouldn't have happened. They didn't care about science though, they saw Lou's video with 48 million views and said "GOTTA GET ME SOMMA DAT!"

[Admire]

Of course there has to be a line. The first part of your argument unfortunately amounts to a paraphrasing of the slippery slope but the second part I can try to tackle.

 

It's less a question of why was it wrong than why did they do it in the first place? Were they seriously exposing more people to this incident? Or just perpetuating the idea that it even is an incident? They say they have 200,000 views as if that's impressive. The Unbox Therapy one has over 48 MILLION. It was pointless for them to make another video of a pseudo-problem when more popular ones already exist. If you can figure out why they did it god on you. What I see is a magazine that went too far in their subtle slander of Apple and now regret their decision. If you see something else I'm waiting to here what it is.

 

I see apple going to far in their retaliation by calling up the magazine, like they were parents taking away candy from a kid, and now they can enjoy the bad publicity of looking like somebody who can't handle criticism.

 

There has been a nonstop stream of extremely positive reviews and articles about the latest iphone, endless exposure that no other competitor even comes close to, but a few videos about bendgate and suddenly its slander, and all the lemmings in the apple store are just incensed that not every single mention of apple is 100% positive....

 

Listen, i fucking agree that those videos are stupid(although I think unbox therapy has been fairer since he has done bendtest with other phones too) but this is such a childish reaction and it only confirms apple's bully reputation that if you cross them, you are going down.

 

 

Way to stay classy apple. Its good to see that Steve Jobs persecution complex didn't go with him to the grave.

 

Apple is the big guy......Apple has so many advantages over its competitors but yet this constant feeling of how everybody is out of get you prevails.

[mr moose]

No, because Consumer Reports already did that. Computerbild just rehashed the already tired hand-bending test videos that are completely unscientific and don't add anything to the discussion. If there had been any inkling of science in their test this wouldn't have happened. They didn't care about science though, they saw Lou's video with 48 million views and said "GOTTA GET ME SOMMA DAT!"

 

So what your saying is there should be an upper limit to the amount of media outlets that are allowed to report on an issue?  that if there are already too many articles and videos on a subject that it is all of a sudden unethical for someone to report on it?  I don't think so. 

 

It is irrelevant how many people have reported on it,  the question is was apple unethical in their response?  Given the information we have the answer is yes.

[Builder]

Its good to see that Steve Jobs persecution complex didn't go with him to the grave.

AHA. I think we're done here.

 

It is irrelevant how many people have reported on it,  the question is was apple unethical in their response?  Given the information we have the answer is yes.

Why is it unethical? They didn't make them take down any of their stuff. The fact that you think they should be required to let these trolls in is what I'd like to examine.

[Trik'Stari]

AHA. I think we're done here.

 

Why is it unethical? They didn't make them take down any of their stuff. The fact that you think they should be required to let these trolls in is what I'd like to examine.

I'd like to examine your dimentia to be honest. They are a journalism magazine that can write about whatever they so choose, and examine things their own way for their viewership. I think your posts here go towards showing you for what you are, an apple astroturfer in all likelihood.

 

You defend EVERYTHING they do, even in instances like this where they are clearly throwing a tantrum that someone would dare speak ill of them.

[KamiKatze]

As a german i find this rather halarious. I don't like apple especially since their latest release but i also don't like Bild, it's much like The Sun in the UK or.... Fox news in the US? no, not that stupid.

 

But I'm on Bild's side this time, journalists can say what they want if they keep it tidy. Apple should've released a proper product in the first place! They deserve every bit of negative PR that they are getting lateley.

 

#AppleDiedWithJobs

[mr moose]

AHA. I think we're done here.

 

Why is it unethical? They didn't make them take down any of their stuff. The fact that you think they should be required to let these trolls in is what I'd like to examine.

 

Because you said "Computerbild just rehashed the already tired hand-bending test videos that are completely unscientific and don't add anything to the discussion."  So what it sounds like you are saying is that because computerbild reported on something that others already have means that they should be banned from apple events and receiving samples.  That doesn't sound ethical to me. 

 

So what is the number, how many reports should there be on a topic before a company starts blacklisting media outlets?

[Admire]

AHA. I think we're done here.

 

Why is it unethical? They didn't make them take down any of their stuff. The fact that you think they should be required to let these trolls in is what I'd like to examine.

 

Dude, that was so weak! At least respond to my points instead of acting offended and trying to claim some moral highground.

 

Thats a copout of epic proportions...One sentence taken out of context...

 

Take on your big boy pants and continue the debate instead of that crap.

[Builder]

So what is the number, how many reports should there be on a topic before a company starts blacklisting media outlets?

What exactly do you mean by "blacklisting?" You seem awful quick to jump to the conclusion that they're trying to cover up a massive PR scandal instead of just blacklisting an organization that clearly doesn't care about the truth when it comes to reviewing Apple products. That's what it comes down to for me.

 

Dude, that was so weak! At least respond to my points instead of acting offended and trying to claim some moral highground.

I don't want to have the Android-iOS argument again so I'm not going to start it. This isn't persecution. This is essentially not giving them a party invite next time. They didn't force them to take it down.

[Trik'Stari]

Dude, that was so weak! At least respond to my points instead of acting offended and trying to claim some moral highground.

 

Thats a copout of epic proportions...One sentence taken out of context...

 

Take on your big boy pants and continue the debate instead of that crap.

All he ever does is copout and run away. after insulting and demeaning the person making an argument.

[mr moose]

What exactly do you mean by "blacklisting?" You seem awful quick to jump to the conclusion that they're trying to cover up a massive PR scandal instead of just blacklisting an organization that clearly doesn't care about the truth when it comes to reviewing Apple products. That's what it comes down to for me.

 

I don't want to have the Android-iOS argument again so I'm not going to start it. This isn't persecution. This is essentially not giving them a party invite next time. They didn't force them to take it down.

 

Blacklisting:

A blacklist (or black list) is a list or register of entities or people who, for one reason or another, are being denied a particular privilege, service, mobility, access or recognition

 

 

I never said cover up nor did I mention a scandal. I did not even "jump to a conclusion"

 

But feel free to answer the question I did ask:

 

 

 

So what is the number, how many reports should there be on a topic before a company starts blacklisting media outlets?

[Builder]

I know I'm not the only one who thinks you're an astroturfer.

Oh really? Who else?

 

I never said cover up nor did I mention a scandal. I did not even "jump to a conclusion"

Yes. You've asserted that what they did was wrong. You have to back that claim up.

[Admire]

What exactly do you mean by "blacklisting?" You seem awful quick to jump to the conclusion that they're trying to cover up a massive PR scandal instead of just blacklisting an organization that clearly doesn't care about the truth when it comes to reviewing Apple products. That's what it comes down to for me.

 

I don't want to have the Android-iOS argument again so I'm not going to start it. This isn't persecution. This is essentially not giving them a party invite next time. They didn't force them to take it down.

 

Nobody is having an Android-IOS argument! I said competitors to specifically avoid that! You are being so interlectually dishonest by just taking a single sentence out of my entire post and then acting all offended afterwrds!

 

Apple called them. They could have just not given them an invite the next time, and not given them devices next time, but no. They called them, they wanted people to know that computerbild had sinned! Its Katie Cotton all over again.

 

If you don't think that what apple does is wild intimidation, then let me show you how well it works.

 

Apple PR person for ages Katie Cotton resigned, and CNNMoney wrote a story like many other tech sites about her. A single sentence of that article is negative and it was removed within hours of posting it..In the middle of a glowing article, this sentence appeared ""She was always cold and distant. And she complained to my editors that I didn't seem to love Apple's products as much as she hoped I would. We tried to explain that loving Apple products wasn't part of my job description, but that never registered."

 

It was removed within hours. This is what tech journalism has evolved too, because of shit tactics like this.

 

I will call out everybody who does this...this is not just apple, but apple are huge sinners in this regard.

 

 

Oh...AND WILL YOU PLEASE START ANSWERING PEOPLE'S QUESTIONS!? You just pick and choose whichever part of peoples post you want to quote, ignore the rest and act like we never made any arguments.

 

You are better than this

[Builder]

Oh...AND WILL YOU PLEASE START ANSWERING PEOPLE'S QUESTIONS!? You just pick and choose whichever part of peoples post you want to quote, ignore the rest and act like we never made any arguments.

 

You are better than this

No, I'm not better than that. If I cut out bits of your post it's because I think it fails the BS test so badly it's not worth replying to. I try and pick out the essence of your response and roll with that. You brought up Steve Jobs having a persecutory attitude, and please correct me if I'm wrong in saying you meant him attacking Android.

 

The fact that you don't realize that quote from Katie Cotton has multiple meanings is rather concerning. You said other tech outlets said the same thing, show me.