So it does quote someone who’s quote you are going to ignore because you don’t like it. Genius, absolutely genius.
No, I’m ignoring it because the author of the piece is trying to get engineering, manufacturing, and costing information about multiple different products from multiple different brands, based on an off hand comment made by a marketing person from one of them about one of their products.
Yes because the author is obligated to report this when writing the article by going undercover as a Chinese defector, working up from the factories, becoming CEO of China and then finally putting this information out to public. Who would have thought becoming an Android news reporter requires such sacrifice. No wonder no one wants to work in this field.
Maybe “Android News Reporter” isn’t a job that attracts the best and brightest from journalism school.
It has information on THREE brands with three different technologies attempting to make a change, with information about multiple variables about why they think they can replace Corning. I didn’t realise the author had to create a new Wikipedia before putting this out. Maybe he should’ve started a GoFundMe?
No, it has “information” that three brands are sometimes not using Gorilla Glass in some of their phones, it then has a marketing fluff quote from one of them.
You say “marketing person” or “marketing quote” as if that means nothing - reporting factual information from them is standard practice in all news. Maybe there should be literally nothing posted by any news website in the world then?
In fact, why even post reviews? Obviously nobody wants marketing fluff like “phone has 12GB RAM”, those damn capitalist corporations are faking that too, there’s only one person in this world who’s woke enough to understand that. These idiots should realise that [phone 2025] is obviously going to be better than [phone 2024]. Maybe those scrubs should realise that before writing a sham of an article.
You say “marketing person” or “marketing quote” as if that means nothing - reporting factual information from them is standard practice in all news. Maybe there should be literally nothing posted by any news website in the world then?
Bruh, do all the news sources you read just repost marketing statements? I don’t think you realize what an own-goal that statement is.
Journalism involves reporting on true information, including determining whether or not information is true, or likely to be true, it’s not just reposting corporate fluff.
In fact, why even post reviews? Obviously nobody wants marketing fluff like “phone has 12GB RAM”, those damn capitalist corporations are faking that too, there’s only one person in this world who’s woke enough to understand that. These idiots should realise that [phone 2025] is obviously going to be better than [phone 2024]. Maybe those scrubs should realise that before writing a sham of an article.
Here’s a fun fact for you: there’s a fundamental difference between reposting a claim someone else made, and evaluating and testing something and making your own claim about it.
No, I’m ignoring it because the author of the piece is trying to get engineering, manufacturing, and costing information about multiple different products from multiple different brands, based on an off hand comment made by a marketing person from one of them about one of their products.
Maybe “Android News Reporter” isn’t a job that attracts the best and brightest from journalism school.
No, it has “information” that three brands are sometimes not using Gorilla Glass in some of their phones, it then has a marketing fluff quote from one of them.
You say “marketing person” or “marketing quote” as if that means nothing - reporting factual information from them is standard practice in all news. Maybe there should be literally nothing posted by any news website in the world then?
In fact, why even post reviews? Obviously nobody wants marketing fluff like “phone has 12GB RAM”, those damn capitalist corporations are faking that too, there’s only one person in this world who’s woke enough to understand that. These idiots should realise that [phone 2025] is obviously going to be better than [phone 2024]. Maybe those scrubs should realise that before writing a sham of an article.
Bruh, do all the news sources you read just repost marketing statements? I don’t think you realize what an own-goal that statement is.
Journalism involves reporting on true information, including determining whether or not information is true, or likely to be true, it’s not just reposting corporate fluff.
Here’s a fun fact for you: there’s a fundamental difference between reposting a claim someone else made, and evaluating and testing something and making your own claim about it.