punditry
Latest
The dumbest iPhone rumor story we've seen yet
Here at TUAW, we're not shy about taking some of the more vapid rumors that circulate through the blogosphere to task. But recently, I stumbled across an article (on Macworld UK no less) which really takes the cake. The article in question is less a rumor roundup than an embarrassingly lazy and overtly transparent exercise in SEO manipulation and link-baiting. You see, the article in question is (wait for it...) a compilation of rumors, features and release date information regarding the iPhone 7. Yep, you read that the correctly. The iPhone 6 doesn't even officially exist and the bombardment of asinine iPhone 7 rumors has already begun. Now let's be clear: if someone out there has done some substantive research and/or checked with reliable sources as to what features the iPhone 7 might house, then by all means, bring it on. But in stark contrast, the Macworld piece is so bizarrely empty that I couldn't help but draw attention to what may very well be the most vapid iPhone rumor story we've seen in quite some time. It's not worth the effort to digest the complete article, so here are a few highlights: It may seem a little premature, but you'll be surprised at how much speculation there is about the iPhone 7 already. Correction: It is beyond premature as there is little to no speculation regarding the iPhone 7. The first thing we'll address here is the name of the next iPhone. If Apple sticks to its traditional naming conventions, then it's more likely that the 2015 iPhone will be called the iPhone 6S instead of the iPhone 7. Fascinating. The rest of the article takes us on a mindless stroll through all sorts of topics, from calling the iPhone 7 the iPhone Air to anticipating a release date at WWDC 2015. As you might expect, there is absolutely no sourcing for any of these assertions. Substantive evidence is nowhere to be found as practically of the article's assertions seem to have been quite literally conjured up out of thin air. Looking closer at Apple's patent portfolio, we can come up with some further iPhone 7 features that could well be on the cards for 2015. Face recognition could be used to unlock the device, and/or the entire display of the iPhone 7 could be a TouchID fingerprint sensor, eliminating the need for a Home Button and making room for a larger display. Lord have mercy. The article then lazily claims that the iPhone 7 will run iOS 9 (shocking!) and may sport an A9 processor (no way!). Right now, it's difficult to know which leaks and snippets of evidence relate to the iPhone 6, and which actually look further ahead to the iPhone 7. You don't say. As of September, however, we expect that iPhone 7 rumours will be rife almost immediately after the iPhone 6 is unveiled, so we'll be here with the latest speculation as soon as it arrives. I don't doubt it, and that last statement is probably the only truthful item in the entire article.
Bloomberg joins the linkbait game with bizarre Apple/Samsung story
A recent Bloomberg story about Samsung "sticking it" to Apple shows that even reputable sites will sink to new lows in an effort to create a story out of nothing. In the world of tech writing, and Apple in particular, there are no shortage of linkbait headlines that house no substantive content and exist solely to attract eyeballs. From beyond questionable photo leaks of as of yet un-announced Apple products to moronic talking heads on CNBC who never cease to proclaim that Apple is doomed, one should clearly absorb their daily dose of Apple news with a discerning eye. But not everything is a wasteland of despair. There are of course a number of reputable sites out there that do solid reporting and are ably able to separate the wheat from the chaff; which is why I was quite surprised to see Bloomberg taking the road too often travelled in a bizarre and empty article that was published this past Friday. Titled "Samsung Sticks It to Apple With Swiss Railways Deal", the article simply relays that Swiss Federal Railways signed a new deal with Samsung wherein railway employees will be given mobile Samsung devices. Why is this of any note? Well, it isn't really. But since Apple licensed the iPad clock design from Swiss Federal Railways (after claims that Apple misappropriated it) , Bloomberg deemed it appropriate to create a story out of thin air. The Bloomberg report reads in part: The history wasn't mentioned in Samsung's press release, but you can bet the timing of the announcement was no coincidence. A new trial kicked off on March 31 in Silicon Valley, where Apple is accusing Samsung of copying its designs for the iPhone and iPad. Apple's lawyers are trying to portray a culture of "fast following" at Samsung and to highlight Apple innovations. Needless to say, the Swiss clock probably won't be part of Apple's legal argument. Actually, I'd bet the timing of the announcement was PURE coincidence and has absolutely nothing to do with Apple and Samsung's ongoing court battle in California. Samsung is a marketing machine and pays many celebrities and entities to use their products. The latest such business deal involves 30,000 devices earmarked for Swiss Federal Railways. The business deal, unless Bloomberg can provide evidence to the contrary, has absolutely nothing to do with "sticking it" to Apple. Even more astounding is that Bloomberg chose to run with their unabashedly linkbait headline even though the article relays a quote from a Swiss Railways spokesman who said that the "decision to team up with Samsung was unrelated to the issue with Apple in 2012." Simply put, the company asked for bidders and Samsung came out on top. Not to be outdone, Business Insider jumped on the linkbait non-story with its own sensationalist article titled, "Apple Ripped Off This Clock Design For The iPad And Now The Owners Have Given A Huge Contract To Samsung." Two sites. One Story. No critical thinking or analysis. Just another day in tech.
The Soapbox: On MMO negativity
Disclaimer: The Soapbox column is entirely the opinion of this week's writer and does not necessarily reflect the views of Massively as a whole. If you're afraid of opinions other than your own, you might want to skip this column. Last week I was given a link to an op-ed piece at Thade's place, and in lieu of posting a comment there, I figured I'd do it on the Soapbox and hopefully generate some discussion (and traffic) for all concerned. In a nutshell, Thade questions whether MMO pundits actually like MMOs, and he comments on a perceived rise in negativity amongst what are assumed to be fans of the genre. I don't know if the blogosphere has taken a turn toward the negative, but if so, there's a pretty simple explanation for it. The games have changed, and the old guard who grew up with MMOs (and are willing/able to devote time to blogging about them) have to try a little bit harder to enjoy themselves as each new title gets further and further from what they like. That's OK, though, and it's also OK -- and even essential -- for the disaffected to speak up.
