The sorry state of tech journalism when it comes to Apple

[Rogifan]

Around New Years eve a story started floating around tech sites (and even some mainstream news sites) about Samsung beating out Apple in the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) smartphone customer satisfaction survey.(H/T Phillip Elmer Dewitt) Apparently this story originated with Zach Epstein over at BGR but was picked up at places like Engadget (who mused that perhaps customers were unhappy with the larger iPhone sizes or that bendagte factored in to the lower score) and 9to5Mac among others.



Only problem with this story is the results are from May 2014 and the iPhone 6 is obviously no where to be found in the survey. In fact neither is the Galaxy S5.

How can BGR get away with passing off a May 2014 survey as current news and how do all these other websites run with it without checking the source? Jordan Kahn at 9to5Mac admits in his story that the data "was first reported in May" but still ran the story anyway. Engadget speculates about iPhone 6 and 'bendagte' when those phones weren't even included in the survey. I know when I first saw the story at Engadget I assumed it was recent as they called it "the latest survey". Only after the fact (and 174 comments) did Engadget update their story to say the data was actually from May. Yet they didn't feel the need to pull the story or at least update the headline.

I'm sorry but this is just embarrassing and another reason I'm skeptical about anything the media reports on Apple. It's so obvious there's an anti-Apple agenda that the broader tech media is all to happy to advance, even if it includes recycling 7 month old data.

 

[cambookpro]

BGR are a joke, just a bunch of click-bait articles.

I'm not surprised their story got picked up by others, quite a few journalists (not just technology journalists) seem to be exceedingly lazy these days. Even fairly well respected news publications like the BBC and The Times here in the UK have made mistakes like this over the past few weeks reporting stories that just weren't true.

It's trendy to hate on Apple these days in the media, so I'm not surprised to see other sites jump on this story and run with it.

 

[AFEPPL]

I think you are reading more into it than is there.

Theres no global anti apple moment or agenda. Apple have has a series of bad events and stories this year and they have to learn from it. With the iOS and OS X issues this year i can imagine all but the cult apple follows are more than a little disappointed.

 

[Rogifan]

I think you are reading more into it than is there.

Theres no global anti apple moment or agenda. Apple have has a series of bad events and stories this year and they have to learn from it. With the iOS and OS X issues this year i can imagine all but the cult apple follows are more than a little disappointed.

The fact is BGR ran a story based on a 7 month old survey as current news and others picked up on it without doing any fact checking. There is no "current survey" that shows Samsung beating out Apple in smartphone satisfaction. That's just embarrassingly bad journalism. If Zach Epstein wants to commission a survey of iOS and OS X users and run a story on it fine. But don't try and peddle a 7 month old survey as something new.

 

[Rogifan]

Here's another example just from today. Venture capitalist Fred Wilson put up a blog post the other day on what he expects will happen in tech in 2015. He wrote that he didn't think Watch would be a runaway hit like the iPod, iPhone and iPad. Business Insider turned that into "Venture Capitalist says Watch will flop" which in turn CNBC has been talking about all morning. CNBC actually reported on air a tweet from Wilson complaining about how they and BI are distorting what he said. Coincidentally (or not) Apple stock is down about 2% so far today. Not surprising to me when you have CNBC running chyrons all morning with then words Apple Watch Flop.

What CNBC and BI shoud really be reporting is the fact that neither the iPod nor iPhone were huge sellers in year one. Watch not having current iPhone like sales figures does not equate it to being a flop. It will be like almost every other Apple product when first launched. iPad was the exception, not the norm.

 

[ChrisA]

...s picked up at places like Engadget (who mused that perhaps customers were unhappy with the larger iPhone sizes or that bendagte factored in to the lower score) and 9to5Mac among others....

You get what you pay for.

How much did you pay to read that copied article? Nothing. What do you think the "journalist" got paid to write it? Very close to nothing.

If you were reading a major print media there would be a full time journalist who is paid full time and a full time editor who is also paid. These people would have fact-checked using primary sources not just going by what they read on some random Internet web page.

But when the news is written by a guy working at home for next to nothing all he has time for is to cut and paste for other web sites.

If I were getting paid to write this, I'd take time to find and read each of the articles myself and contact the authors and then I'd pass this message to someone who would proof read it and verify it wuss accurate.

Buy a subscription to a real news paper, read the on-line version, it usually has more content then the printed version.

 

[JackieInCo]

I read this on MSN News this week also.

 

[chown33]

If you've ever heard the term "media echo chamber", now you see it in action.
There's even a brief Wikipedia article on it:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echo_chamber_(media)

With all the different competing "sources" on the net, more and more echoes get added over time, with little or no filtering. Why? Because repeating stories takes far less work than verifying them, and bursting bubbles makes readers unhappy (or even rebellious).

 

[cambookpro]

What CNBC and BI shoud really be reporting is the fact that neither the iPod nor iPhone were huge sellers in year one. Watch not having current iPhone like sales figures does not equate it to being a flop. It will be like almost every other Apple product when first launched. iPad was the exception, not the norm.

That's a pretty small sample size to be calling anything 'the exception', especially since Apple's stock price is now around 70x higher than it was in 2001.

The reality is that Apple is a completely different company than it ever was in 2001, 2007 or 2010. Even since the iPad was announced (Q1 2010), iPhone sales numbers have increased over 580% quarterly.

I wholeheartedly agree that the stories that were running were full of hyperbole and were essentially a non-story. However, if the Apple Watch does not do relatively well in its first year (probably more than, say, 25-30m units), then yes, it will be probably be seen as a flop. Apple is the largest company in the world and can, and should be, making their hottest new product sell.

 

[CEmajr]

Article about Apple = clicks
Article about Apple that's negative = even more clicks

Samsung's smartphone business is in a state of absolute free fall and they're panicking while Apple is at the most successful point they've ever been in their history, mostly thanks to the iPhone. Who do you think customers are more satisfied with? The company who's phones no one wants or the company who can barely keep theirs stocked on shelves because they sell so quickly?

It's always amusing to me to see these misleading articles posted by these "tech sites" for clickbait. A couple of years ago it was a "marketshare problem" that Apple had and now that it's become clear that the marketshare argument was a fallacy, now they've begun to literally create "issues" out of thin air in order to keep the "doom and gloom" articles pumping.

 

[Rogifan]

And here's another one I found via Yahoo News:

Study: 80% Of iPhone Users Not Likely To Buy An Apple Watch Next Year

Of course flip that headline around and 20% of iPhone owners buying an Watch in the first year is quite bullish. But that wouldn't be very good click bait would it? All these Watch surveys are nothing more than click bait (and the tech media echo chamber wanting to push a specific meme) under the guise of 'research'. It's impossible for random firms/media sites to gage purchasing intent of a product most people have not seen in person and a product that we still don't know a lot about. Arguably Apple hasn't even begun trying to sell Watch to consumers.

 

[roadbloc]

Journalists want the most clicks and reads. This has been the case since the dawn of time. You will just have to get used to it or hope Apple become a smaller and less noticed company. I don't see the point in this thread, its like complaining the sky is blue.

 

[maflynn]

Only problem with this story is the results are from May 2014 and the iPhone 6 is obviously no where to be found in the survey. In fact neither is the Galaxy S5.

By the same token, you can make an argument that the IP6 could have lowered those results, due to the bending issue.

True some of the data is out of date, but almost every survey contains stale data.

 

[OllyW]

And here's another one I found via Yahoo News:

Study: 80% Of iPhone Users Not Likely To Buy An Apple Watch Next Year

Of course flip that headline around and 20% of iPhone owners buying an Watch in the first year is quite bullish. But that wouldn't be very good click bait would it? All these Watch surveys are nothing more than click bait (and the tech media echo chamber wanting to push a specific meme) under the guise of 'research'. It's impossible for random firms/media sites to gage purchasing intent of a product most people have not seen in person and a product that we still don't know a lot about. Arguably Apple hasn't even begun trying to sell Watch to consumers.

My biggest criticism of that headline is that it should be - Study: 80% Of US iPhone Users Not Likely To Buy An Apple Watch Next Year.

 

[Rogifan]

By the same token, you can make an argument that the IP6 could have lowered those results, due to the bending issue.

True some of the data is out of date, but almost every survey contains stale data.

You couldn't because there's no survey data to support it. Perhaps next year when they release a new survey (that includes the new iPhones) if Apple's numbers are still low you could make that connection. Though I think 'bendgate' is mostly BS and will be proven so when Apple announces record quarterly iPhone sales this month.

 

[tdale]

Apple is a small company. The phone market share is small, the desktop is very small. Tablet is about 50% roughly. But they make the news, they make the money, its Tall Poppy Syndrome on steroids due to their success as a single manufacturer making their own HW and OS, despite the low global market share.

And this flows to the users, who if they praise, are fanboys, if they respond to negative comments they are defensive. All I know is most of the negative comments are emotion based, so are irrelevant

 

[s15119]

Apple is a small company.

Really? Compared to what?

 

[tdale]

Really? Compared to what?

Whats the point in quoting one comment amongst my entire post.
If you did in fact read the rest of my post you would know by market share. You would the continue on to the end of the article. Instead, "hey, lets quote a couple of words and post a stupid comment"

 

[lowendlinux]

Welcome to the tech press, this has nothing to do with Apple. Another form planted a fake rumor in their forum and it ended being carried by most of the mainstream tech press. No verification run and no story retraction when everything came out.

 

[Premium1]

Around New Years eve a story started floating around tech sites (and even some mainstream news sites) about Samsung beating out Apple in the American Customer Satisfaction Index (ACSI) smartphone customer satisfaction survey.(H/T Phillip Elmer Dewitt) Apparently this story originated with Zach Epstein over at BGR but was picked up at places like Engadget (who mused that perhaps customers were unhappy with the larger iPhone sizes or that bendagte factored in to the lower score) and 9to5Mac among others.



[url=https://fortunedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2015/01/techmeme.png?w=407]Image[/url]



Only problem with this story is the results are from May 2014 and the iPhone 6 is obviously no where to be found in the survey. In fact neither is the Galaxy S5.



How can BGR get away with passing off a May 2014 survey as current news and how do all these other websites run with it without checking the source? Jordan Kahn at 9to5Mac admits in his story that the data "was first reported in May" but still ran the story anyway. Engadget speculates about iPhone 6 and 'bendagte' when those phones weren't even included in the survey. I know when I first saw the story at Engadget I assumed it was recent as they called it "the latest survey". Only after the fact (and 174 comments) did Engadget update their story to say the data was actually from May. Yet they didn't feel the need to pull the story or at least update the headline.



I'm sorry but this is just embarrassing and another reason I'm skeptical about anything the media reports on Apple. It's so obvious there's an anti-Apple agenda that the broader tech media is all to happy to advance, even if it includes recycling 7 month old data.

It's BGR. That site is a joke. Their "articles" are nothing more than a few sentences and then linked to the actual article. They do not check their sources, all they want is to get the fanboys attacking each other in the comments and page views.

 

[Meister]

The quality of mainstream journailism has declined for decades.
Thank god for the internet!

 

[Rogifan]

It's BGR. That site is a joke. Their "articles" are nothing more than a few sentences and then linked to the actual article. They do not check their sources, all they want is to get the fanboys attacking each other in the comments and page views.

What's funny is in this particular case they never linked to a source (at least I couldn't find it). Makes sense though as the source would have shown their article is 6 months out of date.

 

[Premium1]

What's funny is in this particular case they never linked to a source (at least I couldn't find it). Makes sense though as the source would have shown their article is 6 months out of date.

They are notorious for that too. Not linking or giving credit to a source.

 

[Rogifan]

They are notorious for that too. Not linking or giving credit to a source.

I'm surprised no one has sued them. Obviously they have zero ethics.

Here's a paragraph from their story:

Despite this year’s release of the iPhone 6 and iPhone 6 Plus, which combined to make up the biggest cell phone launch in history with more than 10 million units sold through the end of their debut weekend, Apple earned a customer satisfaction score of 79 out of 100, dropping 2.5% from the 81 it scored in 2013.

Um, Zach, it would be difficult for the 6 and 6 Plus to have an impact on the results of this survey as it was published 4 months before those phones were released!

 

[Premium1]

I'm surprised no one has sued them. Obviously they have zero ethics.



Here's a paragraph from their story:







Um, Zach, it would be difficult for the 6 and 6 Plus to have an impact on the results of this survey as it was published 4 months before those phones were released!

I think sometimes they don't even read the things they write, just look at the headline and first few sentences and write their "stories"