Welcome to the Windows Central Forums Create Your Account or Ask a Question Answers in 5 minutes - no registration required!
Results 1 to 15 of 15
  1. crystal_planet's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    997 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,045 Global Posts
       #1  
    Tech Crunch recently took to task a review on the Lumia 620, which they claimed was bias towards Nokia. Fair enough. However the review was written on a Nokia blog, so their indignation is void.

    Normally, I wouldn't link such stupidity here (or anywhere else) but the hypocrisy hit me between the eyes like a 20 lb sledge hammer. The comments are worth the read.

    Biased Review | TechCrunch
    My next phone...
  2. #2  
    lol, the comments are funny.
  3. Tiwo's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    143 Posts
    #3  
    Yes the comments on TC made me smile :)
  4. stmav's Avatar
    Retired Moderator

    Posts
    3,685 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,767 Global Posts
    #4  
    Glad to see them getting called out in the comments. How could she not know she was opening Pandora's Box with that article?
  5. Chregu's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    7,509 Posts
    Global Posts
    7,539 Global Posts
    #5  
    It just seems childish in the way they did this. If it were more distant and less frustrated, just questioning the sense behind Nokia reviewing its own product, it could have been okay.

    But this looks just like a child that didn't get the candy...
  6. tekhna's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    501 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,059 Global Posts
    #6  
    The point is that it turns up on Google News looking for all the world like a real review, which might confuse consumers. And most companies offer blurbs and positive PR, but they don't assemble whole fake reviews.
  7. #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by tekhna View Post
    The point is that it turns up on Google News looking for all the world like a real review, which might confuse consumers. And most companies offer blurbs and positive PR, but they don't assemble whole fake reviews.
    Agree. On the other hand, there is barely a site out there that doesn't harbour a major bias in one or the other direction. Sites that cloth themselves in the mantle of a legitimate review site without admitting to those biases are far worse. At least in this case, it is glaringly obvious in what direction the reviewer is biased. No?

    Personally, I think the review is terrible... barely any substance at all, yet I find it more honest than what many "legitimate" review sites have on offer.
  8. stmav's Avatar
    Retired Moderator

    Posts
    3,685 Posts
    Global Posts
    3,767 Global Posts
    #8  
    You know what you're getting when you read certain sites. Same as with reading certain posters. You have to take it with a grain of salt and consider the source.
  9. IC Blues's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    27 Posts
    #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by tekhna View Post
    The point is that it turns up on Google News looking for all the world like a real review, which might confuse consumers. And most companies offer blurbs and positive PR, but they don't assemble whole fake reviews.
    Did you even read TC article? For example, they complaint about screen size and they said the screen is smallish. Wow talking about biased review.
  10. tekhna's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    501 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,059 Global Posts
    #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by IC Blues View Post
    Did you even read TC article? For example, they complaint about screen size and they said the screen is smallish. Wow talking about biased review.
    Yes? The issue I was addressing was the Nokia "review" of the 620, not TechCrunch's commentary. And in today's world, 3.8" is smallish. For better or worse. I don't see how pointing that out is evidence of bias.
  11. #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by stmav View Post
    You know what you're getting when you read certain sites. Same as with reading certain posters. You have to take it with a grain of salt and consider the source.
    Yeah, you and I do, but we hang around places like this and certainly digest a lot more smartphone related information than most. I think tekhna was referring to the non-smartphone-enthusiast, as was I, and it is precisely those people that more heavily rely on the information such review sites publish. In most cases you can take an uninformed buyer, sit him/her infront of any particular review website, and after one hour correctly predict which device they would buy... depending on which review site you provided access to of course. It's kind of ridiculous.
  12. tekhna's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    501 Posts
    Global Posts
    1,059 Global Posts
    #12  
    Quote Originally Posted by a5cent View Post
    Yeah, you and I do, but we hang around places like this and certainly digest a lot more smartphone related information than most. I think tekhna was referring to the non-smartphone-enthusiast, as was I, and it is precisely those people that more heavily rely on the information such review sites publish. In most cases you can take an uninformed buyer, sit him/her infront of any particular review website, and after one hour correctly predict which device they would buy... depending on which review site you provided access to of course. It's kind of ridiculous.
    Right. If Google or Apple published their own reviews of their own products, written by their own writers, people here would be calling it propaganda or disinformation to mislead consumers--and rightly so. Instead for some reason people are defending it? Not really sure why.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by tekhna View Post
    And in today's world, 3.8" is smallish. For better or worse. I don't see how pointing that out is evidence of bias.
    Agree again. It is smallish and that must be pointed out. However, implying that this is objectively good or bad is what makes the review entirely unprofessional. The reviewer can point out the consequences of a smaller screen (harder to type quickly, easier to hold with small hands), but should let each reader decide for themselves if that amounts to an overall positive or an overall negative.

    I would also say this doesn't necessarily prove reviewer bias, but as that reviewer never complained about the pre iPhone 5's screen sizes, I think there likely is.
  14. #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by tekhna View Post
    Right. If Google or Apple published their own reviews of their own products, written by their own writers, people here would be calling it propaganda or disinformation to mislead consumers--and rightly so. Instead for some reason people are defending it? Not really sure why.
    I can't speak for others, but personally, I couldn't care less if Apple and Google published their own reviews. I wouldn't take them any more seriously then this self-review from Nokia. I'm not defending them. I just don't take it seriously, so it doesn't bother me. I don't take the verge seriously either, nor engadet, nor a whole host of other main stream review sites. Maybe I'm too cynical, but since I don't expect objective reviews (particularly not from sites targeting mainstream consumers), I don't think any harm was done. At least in this case the site isn't pretending to have an interest in objectivity. For anyone willing to spend three minutes checking out the site it becomes glaringly obvious it is "Nokia only".
  15. squire777's Avatar
    Member

    Posts
    1,248 Posts
    #15  
    That's the first time i've been on AppleCrunch in a long time. What a horrible place

Posting Permissions