To that and your later comments: I think it is the same as I mentionend before for the stern article: It depends on the goal of the journalist. If one wants to inform he will do what you write. If he wants to produce a certain opinion or feeling he will of course not but use manipulative tricks (and in this case very cheap ones). So what happens here? Instead to want to read more about FP the naive reader has a feeling about the FP as the ugly duckling, closes the window, opens the Samsung page and that’s it. Bad journalism is no mistake or randomly bad, it is made on purpose. And yes, I am this paranoid
There were a few phones going around from magazine to magazine. In some articles they mention that.
Well same answer as for my first quote: They don’t want to get it. What better way than to promote Samsung?
Yeah a friend of mine got it and he said it’s totally weird because you touch something all the time by holding the phone … he regretted not to get the “normal” version.
I think many people care (not most, I guess …).
But think about this: If you have 20 articles about a product in well known magazines (unfortunately chip and stern are well known in germany, at least I would think so), from which 5 are very short with almost no information, 5 are longer but badly written like the chip article, 9 may be long and informative but still concentrate on the performance, and 1 really goes into the background and compare quality, supply chain etc. - then it already takes some effort to get the information about you impact as consumer. And if that is the case for let’s say FP, but also for cars, computers, the washing machine and so on then it really is a huge effort for each buyers decision.
I think this effort is what most people avoid, consciously or inconsiously.
I think media could change a lot in consumer behavior if they wanted to (not talking about ads here).