Editorial news calls quite a lot of people Idiots

[Shadrack]

I can't believe people are still on about this

Are some of the people on this site that insecure about them self that they must feel personally attacked by an Editorial?

Give it a rest already

Irony. That is what this thread is. Because so many people are saying it is ok to complain about complainers in an editorial (and call them all idiots) but its not ok to complain about said editorial because if you do you are being overly sensitive. I'm not sure who is being overly sensitive exactly or if just everyone is. Irony for sure.

[Shadrack]

Where did you last check then? Some of the most well-known and popular technology-focused websites?e.g. TechCrunch?publish editorials with similar sentiments.

I didn't agree with the calls for people to be shot, but I understood that those were made in jest, and they were edited out anyway.

So is the goal to be like TechCrunch?

[SoCalRox]

You might want to look up the term "editorial." By definition it's an opinion piece, and if the author thinks that someone is an idiot (for whatever reason) then they can say so.

Editorial comment: You're an idiot.

[SoCalRox]

I remember when this site was a place where people interested in technology could read articles, comment on them and in the forums without fear of being called an idiot, moron or a fanboy. Now it's degenerated into a site just like engadget or gizmodo.

I've noticed it has been sliding downhill rather rapidly of late. Very disappointing...

[ShMaunder]

He could have said something along the lines of "these people have lost touch with technology" ?

Alternatively, fool could replace idiot. Could fool actually match the article better anyway?

[benthebear]

Not that my opinion carries any weight, but since we're all sharing...

When I first saw the article title, I didn't bother to read the article because I had a hunch that it was just linkbait meant to rile up a base to get the hits and comments. Sort of what the Apple related posts are able to do without saying that someone looks like an idiot.

I did go back and read the article, and I feel that my hunch was confirmed. I think it was a bit trollish, and I also think that it's arguing a side of an argument that no one is having. Who is saying that Windows 8 will fail for the same reasons that Vista, "failed,"? (Quoted because it's subjective. I liked Vista, and I dislike ME.) If Vista was a failure to someone, and then they also feel that Windows 8 is a failure, I think it's perfectly reasonable for that person to think that Windows 8 was a failure like Vista. I also think that it's safe to assume that they don't think it's for the same reasons, but for their own. Feel me?

I think that the article could have been written better, and also that Neowin should hold its editorials to a higher standard. I can read a hit piece anywhere, but there are very few places where you can read good editorials. I'm also kind of surprised that the staff members who have come forward support the article, but I guess it's good to have everyone in lockstep.

And he still raises a valid point. If it does fail, it's not going to fail for the same reasons Vista did, so it's not the next Vista :p You can still be all for against 8, it's point is people shouldn't be misappropriating it as Vista 2.0. Regardless, looks like idiots != idiots. Also, there was no calling for people to be shot.

Looks like idiots != idiots is basically arguing semantics. I dare you to go to your significant other and say, "Hey, you look like a fatty," and see how far, "but looks like a fatty != fatty," gets you. If you were me, you would wish for only a warning from a mod.

Where did you last check then? Some of the most well-known and popular technology-focused websites?e.g. TechCrunch?publish editorials with similar sentiments.

I didn't agree with the calls for people to be shot, but I understood that those were made in jest, and they were edited out anyway.

And that's one of the reasons why I stopped reading TechCrunch. The editorials where rushed out the door with little thought just to get people mad so that they could drive page views up. I also stopped reading because TechCrunch liked to air its dirty laundry, and instead of reporting the news, it tried to be the news. It seemed that a lot of the writers they had on staff had egos, and it came to a head after the AOL buyout. Plus, MG Siegler ill informed Apple lovefest got old.

[Xoligy]

Once again nothing is going to be said nor done because they do not care, i agree with some of the posts that the news section has been going down hill and if they are going to start having titles and words that cause flamebait then i see no point in even checking the front page anymore, as someone else already does i just load up the forum now and check my tech news elsewhere its a win, win situation for me.

The rules on this forum which i have already broken once for calling someone dumb said do not insult others or cause flamebait blah blah blah, this is exactly what this article has done BUT its ok, its been wrote by an editor and is on the news page where they have different rules and setting a "good" example is not needed, they want to look like idiots and they want to attract more idiots so let them.

I for one am out of this thread because nothing will be done, people just go back to there areas of the forum they reside in and enjoy what posts you do make, if you want tech news then do like im doing and get it from somewhere else where you ejoy there news articles, which reminds me i better update my phone rss feed.

[Timan Veteran]

Once again nothing is going to be said nor done because they do not care

Oh yes they do...

[andrewbares]

Oh yes they do...

From what you guys have said here, you don't seem to care. I've told you issuing an apology article would be a great step to resolving this, but I haven't seen anything done.

You guys truly believe that good writing involves childish name calling.

[Andre S. Veteran]

I think it's an idiotic title for an article and I didn't read the article because of it. Besides, how pointless is it to talk about how hypothetical others might talk about a future version of Windows?

[Jombi]

What's so difficult about skipping the editorial and moving onto the next?

[Dot Matrix]

What's so difficult about skipping the editorial and moving onto the next?

Because it defended Windows 8. God forbid any techie does that.

[andrewbares]

Because it defended Windows 8. God forbid any techie does that.

Please read the thread before replying. That's not even close to what we have been talking about for the majority of this thread.

[Yusuf M. Veteran]

Because words have meanings beyond what are written in dictionaries. You never heard of connotation before or what? What matters in communication is what a person hears and understands, not what the person says and intends for the listener to understand. Any good communicator knows it not just about strict dictionary meanings of words.

The title in-and-of-itself called out people with a particular opinion "idiots". I don't have that opinion about Windows 8, but it is still name callings, and childish. Neowin is what, 11 years old now? You would think as a site it would be more grown up by now.

Actually, I took into account the negative connotation of "idiot" and hoped that people would see it in a more positive light when they saw that "idiot" means "an utterly foolish or senseless person". I also quoted the definition of "editorial" to reinforce the point that it's just an opinion piece. So to answer your seemingly rhetorical question, I have heard of connotation before. And I know that words are more than just their denotation. Simply because I quoted the denotation of a word doesn't mean I ignored the connotation.

Perhaps it would've been better if the titled of the article was "Calling Windows 8 the next Vista makes you look like a fool" or "Calling Windows 8 the next Vista makes you look like a foolish person" but that wasn't the case. It doesn't say "Calling Windows 8 the next Vista makes you an idiot" so aside from the slight negative connotations of the word idiot, there's really nothing wrong with the title.

[nekkidtruth]

I love that the defense for this is "But he didn't call anyone an idiot! He said it makes you LOOK like an idiot!" Cause...there's a huge difference.... *eyeroll*

That being said, I don't care either way, I just found it funny that the justifications for a blatant troll attempt is down to splitting hairs.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Editorial comment: You're an idiot.

As some of us have realised in the last 24 hours, that's water off a duck's back for me.

Ok, let's compare your silly comment to the article. Out of the gate, you have picked a specific individual and called them an idiot which the article does not. The article says that if someone says that Windows 8 will be the next Vista then they are an idiot because they obviously don't understand the history. From that point onwards it's up to the individual to decide whether they are part of the fools or part of the people that know things.

There's also the fact that the article explains why people are foolish to say that Windows 8 is the next Vista. Does your comment explain what makes you think that I'm an idiot? No. It's just a baseless attack. I may as well call you a dolphin, it's just as arbitrary and supported as your comment.

Can we also all note that the major problem people have with the article is the use of "idiot"? What would people prefer? Foolish? Uninformed? Technologically-incapable? What I don't understand is that it's a word being used to describe anyone, not someone in particular. Personally I read it and didn't take offence, although that's because I'm not going around saying that Windows 8 is the next Vista.

[Scorpus Veteran]

I will make this very clear for everyone: Neowin will continue to use terms like "idiot" in reviews and editorials, where the use is justified in the article.

Brad's article justified the use of "idiot" by explaining why a person is foolish to believe Vista is like Windows 8. If he had called people "idiots" without any reason - eg. his article only included "people who think Vista is like Windows 8 are idiots" - then it would not have been approved.

The discussion in this thread has sparked literally no change in our methods of writing editorials, and internal article scrutiny.

The link between whether something is acceptable on the forums (as in abides by the Community Rules) and on news articles is irrelevant, as news articles are not governed by the Community Rules. We could very well post an article that says "###### Samsung for your ###### plastic crap Galaxy S III", but that would drive away members for obvious reasons and we would lose money. Same would happen were we to write something racist, or linking to pirated material - it's against the Community Rules, but more importantly drives away readers which is not what we want, why we don't post this stuff and use common sense in what we write.

We write for our audience, to entertain and to inform; but also to keep the site alive through revenue. This is not something that forum members need to be concerned about, so that's why the Community Rules are needed for the forums. The methods of business essentially keep our posts conforming to the Rules anyway.

I hope that clears things up.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

Brad's article justified the use of "idiot" by explaining why a person is foolish to believe Vista is like Windows 8. If he had called people "idiots" without any reason - eg. his article only included "people who think Vista is like Windows 8 are idiots" - then it would not have been approved.

Exactly.

We could very well post an article that says "**** you Samsung for your ****ty plastic crap Galaxy S III"

:blink: I'm impressed. How did you write that without the censor kicking in? Special editor powers?

EDIT: Ha, well how's that for proving the point? It censored it when I quoted you...

[Vice]

The discussion in this thread has sparked literally no change in our methods of writing editorials, and internal article scrutiny.

I've never seen staff of a site who are so unwilling to admit when something one of them has said is wrong. It's just nuts the way you guys will protect each other.

His "editorial" was just trolling for page hits, anyone can do that just start saying people should be shot, need shinning or other playground bull**** to get page views. How about you guys just mandate that editorials are well written? This isn't OK Magazine.

I think .. ya know for a while I've been thinking about leaving the site and going to ArsTechnica. I think this just cinched it, by no means the only reason but definitely the last one.

[BajiRav]

Please read the thread before replying. That's not even close to what we have been talking about for the majority of this thread.

No, you are just butthurt for...some reason. It's a freaking editorial. grow up.

[Nick H. Supervisor]

No, you are just butthurt for...some reason. It's a freaking editorial. grow up.

Actually andrewbares is right, what DotMatrix wrote doesn't really have anything to do with this discussion. This isn't about whether Windows 8 is being defended or ridiculed, it's about the use of language within the editorial. The article could be discussing the argument of the world being flat or round (i.e. "People that think the earth is flat are idiots") and this thread would still make sense.

[BajiRav]

I've never seen staff of a site who are so unwilling to admit when something one of them has said is wrong. It's just nuts the way you guys will protect each other.

His "editorial" was just trolling for page hits, anyone can do that just start saying people should be shot, need shinning or other playground bull**** to get page views. How about you guys just mandate that editorials are well written? This isn't OK Magazine.

I think .. ya know for a while I've been thinking about leaving the site and going to ArsTechnica. I think this just cinched it, by no means the only reason but definitely the last one.

A simple minute search on arstechnica.com reveals this: http://arstechnica.c...icking-on-spam/ (Idiot users still intentionally opening, clicking on spam)

So they called users idiot, time to search for new forums then?

Actually andrewbares is right, what DotMatrix wrote doesn't really have anything to do with this discussion. This isn't about whether Windows 8 is being defended or ridiculed, it's about the use of language within the editorial. The article could be discussing the argument of the world being flat or round (i.e. "People that think the earth is flat are idiots") and this thread would still make sense.

what's wrong with the language? may be the needs to be shot part was not politically correct and he has corrected it (explained as well).

[Nick H. Supervisor]

what's wrong with the language?

Look at the title of this thread. "Editorial news calls quite a lot of people Idiots." That is the purpose of this topic, people are unhappy with an article implying that people are idiots for calling Windows 8 "the next Vista." This has nothing to do with if the article is defending Windows 8 or not, it's to do with the article calling a non-defined group of people idiots.

[ichi]

Even though I find the comparison between Vista and Windows8 perfectly fitting I don't think the article is offensive, but it sounds like a childish rant. If your points are sound enough people will be able to draw their own conclusions about whether those supporting certain points of view are idiots or not.

For all I care you can keep publishing editorials like that one as often as you want, but I don't think that editors coming up as immature on FPN does you any good.

[Scorpus Veteran]

I've never seen staff of a site who are so unwilling to admit when something one of them has said is wrong.

It's an opinion. There is no right and wrong, only an opposing opinion.