Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 3rd Sep 2012 21:21 UTC
Pretty scummy stuff by Samsung, this. The company apologised, but what it shows is just how warped tech reporting and blogging really is. Websites are dependent on review items, early access, and press invites, and we really have no idea just how much this influences reporting. Do you really think that reviewers and bloggers who are too critical will get invited to the next product unveil in Cupertino or will get early access to the next Galaxy device? If so, I have a palace to sell you.
Thread beginning with comment 533817
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-06-29
Oh I'm not denying that everything you said is true! It's been proven, after all. I just have this nagging feeling (there we go again) that it's more than just chemicals every now and then.
But again, that's just my opinion and probably bunk.
And you're not being harsh, or at least I'm not taking it that way. 
Again, it's no so much that I wish it to be that way, rather that it's just how I feel about it. But feelings can also be misleading, and as I said before I'm not denying anything you've said about it from a scientific standpoint.
Member since:
2006-02-15
I never said it is wrong, but it still is based on a selfish motive.
Actually, from a psychological standpoint that's how you were conditioned to behave. You wouldn't be doing that if you didn't receive a small boost on your endorphine levels.
I know it sounds rather harsh and it's quite clearly not how you wish to see it -- you obviously feel better about romanticizing the notion of doing something for the benefit of others -- but that is how it works from psychological and physiological standpoint.