Originally Posted by calico_pie:
“That's not what I said.
My point was that it seems as though because its Apple, it gets wholly disproportionate coverage.
If this sort of thing happens on any other platform, no one would bat an eye.”
In terms of click baiting, Apple do get disproportionate coverage.
Initially the articles were almost exclusively exercises in sycophancy by supposed technology journalists whom believed that the world started in 2007.
Now Apple have become click bait. Read an article about the latest LG (or whatever) phone, and the editor will have littered the article with references to the iPhone.
Increasingly the press
are willing to cover negative stories about Apple, this story, one which could potentially have a bigger impact on the average punter than any other is strangely absent from the main stream press.
The exception being the Guardian which covered the story after it had been mentioned in the comments section of a different story. Mentions in The Register? None. BBC? None. PC Advisor? None. It would be quicker to mention the outlets that have covered it.
I can only imagine that there is some kind of unofficial press embargo. If the mainstream press cover this story then Apple owners will be inundated with the messages. Perhaps they are hoping that Apple will release a patch in the next few days. Not sure why they would assume that to be the case given that Apple have been aware of it for 6 months.
Thus far the effects of the Unicode of death have been mitigated by the actions of FaceBook, websites and 3rd party twitter apps and not by Apple.
Such treatment IS disproportionate. The press were happy to, for example, cover the 3d gun stories, knowing that doing so would lead to more people downloading the plans.
Regardless, it is not the job of the press to supress stories. Should they have kept quiet about Syrian nerve gas attacks so that quiet "diplomatic" talks could take place behind the scene? (And no I am not directly equating the severity of the two stories).