truth in advertising

[Charles Martin]

> From: "Eric B. Richardson" <lbyron at comcast.net>
>> Apple does not want to associate itself with ANY political ideology.
>> Apple's mission is well above such petty nonsense as partisan
>> politics.
>
> Wow, talk about the Mac cult.
>
What I meant is that Apple's core mission (aside from making enough 
money/selling enough computers to stay in business) is to empower 
people to do new and interesting things with their computers. To use 
computers as more than just a tool. Steve Jobs likes to talk about 
Apple as "being at the intersection of art and commerce," and that's 
about as good a definition as I can put on it.

Maybe that does make Apple and the people who buy into that a "cult," 
but as long as we're creating a cult, I'm glad it's such a nice one.

No political party -- certainly not the miserable pair the US is stuck 
with -- has a monopoly on good ideas, or artistic ideas, or empowering 
ideas. Neither does Apple, but at least they want to raise the bar when 
it comes to elegance, style, creativity and worthwhile endeavour. By 
comparison, the other PC companies and most other software makers look 
like the cast of "Dilbert."

That's what I meant when I said Apple's mission is above petty 
politics. I hope that makes it a bit clearer.

> I tasted the crow, it was pretty tough, but I really didn't eat it,
> because I still don't think that you should get away with the
> exaggerations that you made.
>
Oh come on -- you've *never* told a story or stated a factoid you once 
read somewhere while speaking (or writing) extemporaneously and 
accidentally exaggerated? You've never related an anecdote and later 
realised you'd set the story 10 years earlier than when it actually 
happened? You've never written a post where you put down 5MB when you 
mean 5KB? Give me a freakin' break.

Rush exaggerated his claim. I accidentally exaggerated Rush's 
exaggeration in the retelling. You called me on it, I checked, found I 
was in error and reported it. Doing so lets me off the hook (with a tip 
o the hat to you), but Rush's original (corrected) exaggeration stands.

> I don't think that the ads on Rush's show would hurt Apple, but I
> can't fault Apple for making choices that are their absolute
> prerogative.
>
Let me put this another way so that maybe you'll understand their 
rationale better: would it hurt them to advertise on Al Sharpton's show 
(if he had one)? Would it hurt them in the eyes of conservative Mac 
users like yourself if they were to advertise on Bill Clinton's 
long-rumoured-but-still-mythical TV talk show?

You bet your sweet bippy it would. Apple is quite right to be VERY 
hesitant to associate itself with highly controversial figures (unless 
said figures are either dead or have had so much time elapse that their 
ideas are now considered mainstream, that is -- see the "Think 
Different" ad) of any sort.

> There are liberal leaning talk shows in nearly every market, some are
> expanding.

There's one in Miami that's quite good, I hear.

>  The fact that there are no liberal nationwide shows to
> speak of is not for lack of trying. There have been several over the
> years that have all fallen flat on their face.

If there really is a "liberal media," why is it that conservative talk 
shows succeed and liberal talk shows fail?

No, please don't answer that (at least, not here). So far we've managed 
to stay largely on-topic.

_Chas_
Come to  ... The CHASbah!
http://thechasbah.blogspot.com

**Go see BOWLING FOR COLUMBINE. It may change your life.**