5 ms·

War? Like with machine guns, drones and tanks? I didn't realize Apple has those. In all seriousness: why is every little disagreement labeled as "war" by the U

War? Like with machine guns, drones and tanks? I didn't realize Apple has those. In all seriousness: why is every little disagreement labeled as "war" by the US media? Does it just make "good" headlines?

pdelbarba 14y ago
I'm interested to see what happens next with Google. They're the ones with the androids after all. It just makes for a good headline. Look at the military spending figures and I think a pattern will emerge...
jacques_chester 14y ago
Yes. It's being upvoted and thus draws traffic. That's all that matters.
mistercow 14y ago
It's just a metaphor, and I think a reasonably apt one in this case. Were you genuinely confused that China might be initiating military operations against Apple when you read the headline? In any case, calling it a "little disagreement" when a government launches a propaganda campaign against a company seems pretty disingenuous.
- roc 14y ago
  If Apple actually was using the practices listed: refurb parts, lower warranty coverage, etc. is it really a propaganda campaign? [1] Even evidence of a TV Show paying a celebrity to juice impact of their story is hardly evidence of government involvement. The only evidence I see of government influence is in the outrage against usury being directed at the makers of aspirational products, rather than the predatory lenders. If the bank essentially is the government... you can't really bark up that tree directly. But, again, they dont' seem to have been fabricating charges against Apple. [1] That said, I understand Apple's bind; they need lower costs and lower prices for China. So they have to do something. But it certainly sounds like they took a brand-damaging anti-user approach. (And Apple didn't seem to deny any of it.)
  - Retric 14y ago
    That may have a lot to do with sellers skimming vs. actual refurb parts in the supply chain. Granted consumers don't care, but forgery is really common over there because so many people have access to the type of factory's that produce all that stuff in the first place.
  - AnthonyMouse 14y ago
    >If Apple actually was using the practices listed: refurb parts, lower warranty coverage, etc. is it really a propaganda campaign? Most certainly. Selection bias is bias. The media is never going to cover every fact about a company, and there are different facts that will portray anyone in a different light. See: If-by-whiskey.[1] And if you're worried about affecting their image instead of the speaker's, you pick one side and silence the other. If you decide you like someone, you report only the positive facts about them and viewers like them too. If you decide you don't like them you report only the negative facts and viewers don't like them either. You can do this without telling a single lie, and it's enormously effective because no one can disprove anything you report since it's all true, it's just intentionally incomplete. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey
  - mistercow 14y ago
    >If Apple actually was using the practices listed: refurb parts, lower warranty coverage, etc. is it really a propaganda campaign Yes. "Propaganda" simply means the dissemination of information (true or not) with motivation other than simply helping people to be informed. If the information is being put out in order to hurt Apple's reputation, it's propaganda. And that's generally not much to worry about if it comes from activist groups, corporations, and other sources with transparent biases, but when it's coming from a government (or government controlled media, which equates to the same thing), it's a different situation - especially in a climate where dissenting opinions are quashed. >Even evidence of a TV Show paying a celebrity to juice impact of their story is hardly evidence of government involvement. Except that the Chinese government has tremendous control over the media in China. Add to that the censorship of thousands of whatever Weibo calls "tweets", and it seems pretty obvious that government shenanigans are at work. >The only evidence I see of government influence is in the outrage against usury being directed at the makers of aspirational products, rather than the predatory lenders. That's the only evidence you can see? I would point out all of the other pieces of evidence in the article, but I feel like I'd be just copying and pasting large chunks of it into my comment. Maybe you should just reread it?
- phoboslab 14y ago
  I think that the word "War" deserves a little more respect. With this inflationary use it has completely lost its original meaning. It has become so harmless that you can drop it in almost every headline. Try this: when a girl you don't find attractive asks you out, joke with your colleagues afterwards that "she totally raped you". This makes "Rape" sound casual, which it absolutely shouldn't. Neither should "War" sound casual. I guess what we need is a new word that really means "fighting with machine guns and tanks while lots of mothers grieve over their dead children".
  - Evbn 14y ago
    The rape analogy fails because declining a date is completely non aggressive. OTOH, people claim "rape" each other all the time in trivial activities like video games.
JonnieCache 14y ago
America is seemingly unable to conceptualise the work of government in a positive sense except in terms of industrialised mass-murder. See the war on drugs, the war on obesity, the war on women, the war on christmas, the war on cancer etc.
RexRollman 14y ago
War doesn't just mean armed conflict. From dictionary.com: "active hostility or contention; conflict; contest: a war of words."

pdelbarba 14y ago

I'm interested to see what happens next with Google. They're the ones with the androids after all. It just makes for a good headline. Look at the military spending figures and I think a pattern will emerge...

jacques_chester 14y ago

Yes. It's being upvoted and thus draws traffic. That's all that matters.

mistercow 14y ago

It's just a metaphor, and I think a reasonably apt one in this case. Were you genuinely confused that China might be initiating military operations against Apple when you read the headline? In any case, calling it a "little disagreement" when a government launches a propaganda campaign against a company seems pretty disingenuous.

roc 14y ago
If Apple actually was using the practices listed: refurb parts, lower warranty coverage, etc. is it really a propaganda campaign? [1] Even evidence of a TV Show paying a celebrity to juice impact of their story is hardly evidence of government involvement. The only evidence I see of government influence is in the outrage against usury being directed at the makers of aspirational products, rather than the predatory lenders. If the bank essentially is the government... you can't really bark up that tree directly. But, again, they dont' seem to have been fabricating charges against Apple. [1] That said, I understand Apple's bind; they need lower costs and lower prices for China. So they have to do something. But it certainly sounds like they took a brand-damaging anti-user approach. (And Apple didn't seem to deny any of it.)
- Retric 14y ago
  That may have a lot to do with sellers skimming vs. actual refurb parts in the supply chain. Granted consumers don't care, but forgery is really common over there because so many people have access to the type of factory's that produce all that stuff in the first place.
- AnthonyMouse 14y ago
  >If Apple actually was using the practices listed: refurb parts, lower warranty coverage, etc. is it really a propaganda campaign? Most certainly. Selection bias is bias. The media is never going to cover every fact about a company, and there are different facts that will portray anyone in a different light. See: If-by-whiskey.[1] And if you're worried about affecting their image instead of the speaker's, you pick one side and silence the other. If you decide you like someone, you report only the positive facts about them and viewers like them too. If you decide you don't like them you report only the negative facts and viewers don't like them either. You can do this without telling a single lie, and it's enormously effective because no one can disprove anything you report since it's all true, it's just intentionally incomplete. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/If-by-whiskey
- mistercow 14y ago
  >If Apple actually was using the practices listed: refurb parts, lower warranty coverage, etc. is it really a propaganda campaign Yes. "Propaganda" simply means the dissemination of information (true or not) with motivation other than simply helping people to be informed. If the information is being put out in order to hurt Apple's reputation, it's propaganda. And that's generally not much to worry about if it comes from activist groups, corporations, and other sources with transparent biases, but when it's coming from a government (or government controlled media, which equates to the same thing), it's a different situation - especially in a climate where dissenting opinions are quashed. >Even evidence of a TV Show paying a celebrity to juice impact of their story is hardly evidence of government involvement. Except that the Chinese government has tremendous control over the media in China. Add to that the censorship of thousands of whatever Weibo calls "tweets", and it seems pretty obvious that government shenanigans are at work. >The only evidence I see of government influence is in the outrage against usury being directed at the makers of aspirational products, rather than the predatory lenders. That's the only evidence you can see? I would point out all of the other pieces of evidence in the article, but I feel like I'd be just copying and pasting large chunks of it into my comment. Maybe you should just reread it?
phoboslab 14y ago
I think that the word "War" deserves a little more respect. With this inflationary use it has completely lost its original meaning. It has become so harmless that you can drop it in almost every headline. Try this: when a girl you don't find attractive asks you out, joke with your colleagues afterwards that "she totally raped you". This makes "Rape" sound casual, which it absolutely shouldn't. Neither should "War" sound casual. I guess what we need is a new word that really means "fighting with machine guns and tanks while lots of mothers grieve over their dead children".
- Evbn 14y ago
  The rape analogy fails because declining a date is completely non aggressive. OTOH, people claim "rape" each other all the time in trivial activities like video games.

JonnieCache 14y ago

America is seemingly unable to conceptualise the work of government in a positive sense except in terms of industrialised mass-murder. See the war on drugs, the war on obesity, the war on women, the war on christmas, the war on cancer etc.

RexRollman 14y ago

War doesn't just mean armed conflict. From dictionary.com: "active hostility or contention; conflict; contest: a war of words."