Howdy, Stranger!
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
This forum is in permanent archive mode. Our new active community can be found here.
iPhone on Verizon (bad journalism)
The lead line of this article:
AT&T Inc. is about to lose its lock on the iPhone.
And then, the rest was just painful. Here are my favorite phases of the article:
according to people familiar with the matter,
these people said.
according to one person familiar with the matter.
said people briefed on the phone.
A spokeswoman for Apple declined to comment.
John Donovan, AT&T's chief technology officer, wouldn't comment
said the people briefed on the matter.
A spokesman for Pegatron declined to comment.
people familiar with the decisions have said.
people familiar with the discussion said at the time.
these people said.
one of the people briefed said.
according to a person familiar with the matter.
A spokeswoman for Qualcomm declined to comment.
My favourite sentence:
One person familiar said the fifth-generation iPhone would be a different form factor than those that are currently available, said one person familiar with the new iPhone plan.
Did anyone actually read that line? Two attributions to one comment, but neither of them ACTUALLY saying to whom they are attributing the comments.
AT&T Inc. is about to lose its lock on the iPhone.
And then, the rest was just painful. Here are my favorite phases of the article:
according to people familiar with the matter,
these people said.
according to one person familiar with the matter.
said people briefed on the phone.
A spokeswoman for Apple declined to comment.
John Donovan, AT&T's chief technology officer, wouldn't comment
said the people briefed on the matter.
A spokesman for Pegatron declined to comment.
people familiar with the decisions have said.
people familiar with the discussion said at the time.
these people said.
one of the people briefed said.
according to a person familiar with the matter.
A spokeswoman for Qualcomm declined to comment.
My favourite sentence:
One person familiar said the fifth-generation iPhone would be a different form factor than those that are currently available, said one person familiar with the new iPhone plan.
Did anyone actually read that line? Two attributions to one comment, but neither of them ACTUALLY saying to whom they are attributing the comments.
Comments
I didn't hear no fat lady!
What got to me most about this is that it's just really, really, really shoddy writing. They could have said:
Here's what various sources we can't disclose have told us, directly or indirectly:
list
list
list
These people declined to comment:
Company A
Company B
Company C declined to comment but added this:
Here's what some "men on the street who are no more or less informed than you" think:
blah blah.
But no, they've got to write as though they are trying to make it more... more... I don't even know what they are attempting with this utterly atrocious writing style.
1) ATT gets new customers because of the magical Apple device.
2) Non-ATT cell companies beef up their networks since they can't offer the magical Apple device, which benefits their customers.
3) Android is able to enter the market in a major way as the alternative cool smart phone. Add in the open nature of the software and it is a double win!
4) Apple gets to blame any failing of their magical device on ATT's network and everyone believes them!
If the iPhone were available on every network when it debuted would android phones be where they are now? Would iPhones even be where they are now? Would the other companies have invested as heavily in their networks?
The longer the exclusivity contract exists the better off everyone is.
As a journalism major, I cringed reading that article. WSJ, I am disappoint. It's as if the two authors never looked at an AP style guide before. Shame on the authors, but even more shame on the editor. Clearly, he/she is not doing his/her job.