The different between a movement against the Foxconn conditions and a hetz is how everyone keeps singling out Apple.
Do they want Apple to change the conditions, or do they want everyone to do it? Is it a relevant story to them because of the working conditions or because of Apple's involvement?
I imagine what revealing and and informative articles someone like Pro Publica might be able to do, because they don't have these weird proclivities and know that in order to change a problem, you have to cover it in nuance, detail and, keep running with it, until it picks up and inspires people to effect change.
This by comparison reads like a bland piece with some choice quotes peppered around it. If they had made the article with Apple as an example or example case, then it would be more interesting; the NYT are, after all, the best people in the world at making infographics, in my opinion.
I can't help get the impression that the NYT are ruining what could be a great debate and movement by this silly focus on Apple's part in something that is so much larger than them.
Do they want Apple to change the conditions, or do they want everyone to do it? Is it a relevant story to them because of the working conditions or because of Apple's involvement?
I imagine what revealing and and informative articles someone like Pro Publica might be able to do, because they don't have these weird proclivities and know that in order to change a problem, you have to cover it in nuance, detail and, keep running with it, until it picks up and inspires people to effect change.
This by comparison reads like a bland piece with some choice quotes peppered around it. If they had made the article with Apple as an example or example case, then it would be more interesting; the NYT are, after all, the best people in the world at making infographics, in my opinion.
I can't help get the impression that the NYT are ruining what could be a great debate and movement by this silly focus on Apple's part in something that is so much larger than them.