Jason Alexander writes:
SO WHY DO YOU CONTINUE TO SUPPORT THEM? WHY DO YOU NOT, AT LEAST, AGREE TO SIT WITH REASONABLE PEOPLE FROM BOTH SIDES AND ASK HARD QUESTIONS AND LOOK AT HARD STATISTICS AND POSSIBLY MAKE SOME COMPROMISES FOR THE GREATER GOOD? SO THAT MOTHERS AND FATHERS AND CHILDREN ARE NOT SLAUGHTERED QUITE SO EASILY BY THESE MONSTERS? HOW CAN IT HURT TO STOP DEFENDING THESE THINGS AND AT LEAST CONSIDER HOW WE CAN ALL WORK TO TRY TO PREVENT ANOTHER DAY LIKE YESTERDAY?
via TwitLonger — When you talk too much for Twitter.
I find it amusing that headlines often state the presumptive conclusions of a story as fact, whereas said headline is refuted or made uncertain in the story that ensues. I guess we live in times where this paradoxical ambiguity is tacitly accepted as the norm and we crave sensationalism over cautious and factual reporting.
Take for instance, this headline: Apple to Use In–Cell Tech to Keep the iPhone Screen Thin. That’s pretty cool, right? Well, if it were true. The story—written by Stan Schroeder for Mashable—ends with this note:
Regardless of the overwhelming amount of rumors surrounding the next iPhone, there’s no official confirmation that it will actually have a larger screen, and no firm facts about its design have been revealed. The next iPhone, which follows iPhone 4S, is likely to be officially revealed in the fall.
This is what we know about the next iPhone from Apple: bupkis. We might make the reasonable assumption that new iPhone hardware from Apple is on the horizon, given that the company has introduced a new model each year. And when they do so, the market will tell us if it’s worth all that it’s made out to be.
Perhaps, this is why I spend more of my time reading the likes of Horace Dediu and John Gruber. People need to get off the “Let me write something about Apple” bandwagon unless they have something meaningful to contribute. No wonder Wall Street analysts have serious challenges predicting the short– and long–run financials of the company many love.