Saturday, July 29, 2006

A Quick Update FOR you

As reported by iLounge:

Apple denies 'four years' iPod report, clarifies 'for years'

According to iLounge, Apple has clarified a quote in a Chicago Tribune article where the newspaper quoted Apple spokeswoman Natalie Kerris as saying that iPods are designed to last for "four years." What Kerris actually said, notes the story, is that iPods have a low failure rate and are designed to last "for years."


This is a misquote from a professional journalist here. It incited dozens of forums and got "the iPod haters" riled.

Although it won't happen, I'd like to see a retraction and apology to Apple.

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Newsflash: "for" and "four" are homonyms. If Apple has such a professional PR team then they should start acting like it and being a little more careful in their word choice.

fixyourthinking said...

Since when did "good reporting" shift from the interviewer to the interviewee.

Since when did the Chicago Tribune (I repeat - The Chicago Tribune) not have the editting staff to catch or question homonyms?

It seems pretty simple to me ... the reporter didn't clarify ( as a good journalist should and would ) and chose to report something that SOUNDED like a controversy.

Roget said...

If the Apple spokeswoman had said "iPods will last for four years" then they would have reported correctly.

This was just sloppy journalism....

fixyourthinking said...

Exactly Roget ... it was poor journalism ... as in bad journalism ... not unwealthy journalism ... :-)

I agree on the comment verification ... it has more to do with how many times you post (within a certain timeframe) on a blogger BLOG.

Anonymous said...

Put your Apple fanboyism on pause for 10 seconds. We agree that there is no phonetic difference between 'for years' and 'four years,' correct?

You rightly assert that the reporter should have cleared up the ambiguity. But a professional PR department like Apple's - had it performed its job correctly - shouldn't have given the reporter any ambiguity in the first place. Before calling for the journalist's head for 'incit[ing] dozens of forums' you should recognize that a good deal of the blame lies with Apple PR for what was frankly a rookie mistake. Sloppy reporting, yes; bad corporate communications, most definitely.

Roget said...

Why does someone who happens to dislike the constant knocking of Apple have to be a 'fanboy' fer christs sake?

The phonetic similarity of 'for' and 'four' is not the point.

The fact she said "for years" means it is exactly that.
If the reporter has the IQ of a soggy cornflake and can't figure out that there is a difference from her saying "iPods will last for years" and "iPods will last for four years" is all of a sudden Apples fault?

I bet the spokeswoman didn't realise she was talking to a reporter who should not be allowed to report on their own bowel movements....

So kindly drop the fanboy taunts - just wanting fair reporting is not fanboyism.

And for the record, my desk has botm Macs AND PC's on it....

fixyourthinking said...

I didn't talk about Apple Fans ... I didn't know Apple made air conditioning products!

;-)

Roget said...

I didn't talk about Apple Fans ... I didn't know Apple made air conditioning products!

No they don't but if they did they would be stylish and efficient.....


...and they would work!