You remember yellow journalism, right? Of course you don’t. It’s likely that such journalistic tools were in use long before being exploited by New York City newspapers way back around 1900, but they’re alive and well in the 21st century, that location on the space time continuum where facts and truth seldom prevail, but where faux news is the order of the day on the misinformation superhighway. Oh, and did you hear this about Apple?
I bring up the comparison of yellow journalism because of how Apple is treated unlike any other major technology company; with a scrutiny that even scurilous politicians are not likely to experience.
Way back when, Frank Luther Mott defined yellow journalism thusly.
- scare headlines in huge print, often of minor news
- lavish use of pictures, or imaginary drawings
- use of faked interviews, misleading headlines, pseudoscience, and a parade of false learning from so-called experts
- emphasis on full-color Sunday supplements, usually with comic strips
- dramatic sympathy with the “underdog” against the system.
Not much has changed in decades, has it?
The similarities to politics aside, every week we Apple followers are treated to a melange of headlines which decry Apple’s future as filled with doom and gloom; eye-retchings headlines which top stories of little substance and less analysis and even fewer facts.
Such articles trot out tired but not true industry voices to match the misleading headlines with pseudo analysis of the market or customer base or Apple’s future, which then launch into a litany of items which prove Apple is missing the boat of opportunity yet again.
Back in 1900 it was sensationalist headlines and trumped up arguments which drove circulation, but here in the 21st century it is merely sensationalist headlines and trumped up arguments which drive eyeballs to page views which display ever more intrusive advertising.
Apple, with well over 500-million customers, sitting on a few hundred billion dollars in cash, has become a bellwether target of faux news outlets which eagerly regurgitate non-news, non-fact, non-analysis, quickly rewritten to entice the unsuspecting, to tilt the market in favor of AAPL shorts, or to trump up (pun not intended) a false comparison with a competing product by using outlandish claims or amateurish methodology.
Mere days into 2016 and already Apple has garnered a year’s supply of rumors-cum-fact and here’s a sample.
- Waterproof iPhone 7 – does anyone else see a potential support issue here
- The Apple ring – because waving Watch around isn’t enough
- Apple self-driving car – Google has one, so why not?
- Lightning headphones – because analog is so 1999
- Biometric headphones – with built-in IQ monitor?
- Apple television – the rumor that Just. Won’t. Die.
- Augmented reality – because Glassholes need choices
How is that list much different than the list that started 2015?
Another so-called analyst says Apple may report lower Q1 and Q2 financial estimates because popularity (of older phones; like that’s never happened before). Yet another analyst says even record numbers in Apple’s upcoming financials will not help the stock (which is in the winter doldrums, along with most of the Dow Jones). Businessman-cum-politician Donald Trump has a plan to get Apple to move manufacturing back to the U.S.A. Wherever you turn the technology news pages you’re sure to find something about Apple and seldom is it good news but even then good news is bad for Apple which relies too much on iPhone for revenue and profits (despite every other product group being enormously profitable).
Members of the card-carrying technorati elite politburo stand on barrels of digital ink to spew forth their rhetoric upon an unsuspecting and oft-times gullible public because in the 21st century, where everyone has a voice, there is no accountability for anything said or written.