[nooyurrsdey]

Not everything has to offer new info. Sometimes things bear repeating, it's how we add emphasis and continue the conversation.

Coming out with "Apple is doing a poor job" just once isn't going to move the needle. People have to hear it over and over in a relatable way.

[ameminator]

Fair point - but in that case, I found the author's account unrelatable, so much as to approach uncredible.

Maybe it hits different for other people, but I don't appreciate being given a conclusion without any good discussion

[fleetwoodsnack]

Your critique is bit shallow. That the article does not present any new information to any one reader (you) specifically, or that any one reader (you) cannot relate personally is to be expected and not remarkable given the size of this publication’s audience and the novelty of the phenomenon the article discusses.

I imagine, however, that there are readers for whom this information is novel, and for whom the first-person journalistic style is insightful. In this case, the value here is obvious.

[ameminator]

Yes, I will present my viewpoint. I didn't find this article relatable. I didn't find new information from this article. I think this article objectively is hard to relate to and has little new information.I will share my viewpoint in a comments section - feel free to disagree. If you think it's shallow, it's probably because the original piece didn't have much meat to begin with.

[fleetwoodsnack]

>Yes, I will present my viewpoint

You can, or, alternatively, you can simply acknowledge you’re not the intended audience for the article, and that you may have over-stepped rhetorically in declaring a complete absence of value with respect to insight or novelty in the article; which is there, and obviously so.

[ameminator]

I didn't find any value, and I look forward to someone presenting some value other than "I don't like your critique".

For example, I found this comment section much more enlightening than the article, because commenters here made better discussion than I found in the article.

[fleetwoodsnack]

> I didn't find any value

Not to be crude, but that seems like a personal deficiency, not a demerit of the article. The "commenters here" who "made better discussion than I found in the article," are discussing the implications of the article's information and presenting interesting perspectives. If you didn't find anything of value, perhaps you could try thinking a bit harder or for a bit longer. Others have done so successfully.

[outworlder]

This comment section would not exist without the article.

[parasense]

It's resembling an attack of the author, instead of the authors ideas, aka a form of ad hominem. So it's kinda ironic to say the author adds nothing while simultaneously adding nothing with a non sequitur.

[ameminator]

I know nothing about the author outside of this article and I can't remember ever reading anything else she wrote. The author may be a perfectly virtuous person - but knowing that may actually bias my review/critique.

For example, this is actually a story about a mother worried about her child. I really appreciate that! What I don't appreciate is someone using that to present unsupported positions.

I am attacking the piece that she wrote and it's because I don't think it was a good piece.