My take is that people hate this ad because unintentionally it made them look at the mirror. Like “look what beautiful things you have traded for this single couch computer”. They realized that they too have helped in enabling Apple to squash all this beautiful things and some to the point of no return, and they didn’t like it at all.
"You like playing the guitar for friends on the beach? No. Use a screen instead. You enjoy reading print books, which don't spy on you as you read them? Not acceptable. Use a screen. Do you value being creative, or social, or just living a moment of your life off the screen? Get over it."
"In order to carry out their intrusion, today's colonial Big Tech companies have to convince us that the process is "inevitable" and even beneficial."
People working for so-called "tech" companies may believe that public is already convinced. But if that were true, then why is Apple apologising.
It's just so bizarre to sit here, watching the world build up such a storm in a teacup over this. Destroy a few objects and suddenly everyone's falling over themselves to top each others outrage and ascribe an ever more sinister narrative.
I'm on another board where people railed against Apple for the ad and eventually I came to realize something. They seemed concerned about Apple crushing physical objects and stuffing them into a slab of silicon and glass. But what they really were concerned about was a company that makes so much money, it's an abstraction; Apple is larger than most world economies. If it was anyone a couple of tiers down the corporate income scale, it barely would have raised an eyebrow. At this point, Apple doesn't even have to advertise their products much. The same with the other FANGs. They are inconceivably huge companies and most people don't know how to wrap their heads around that.
Personally, I thought it was a good metaphor, but I'm also not much attached to the items shown. The items were representative, not actually valuable. The things those items can produce in the right hands are immeasurably valuable, but people frequently place more value on the tools than the artist. I guess because they maybe have dreams of owning something rare and valuable.
But those emojis ... I could watch those little f-----s be crushed all damn day.
> See, Apple is saying to us, we’ll destroy everything you hold dear, we’ll remove any ability to make meaning or music or love, yea, we will even crush your head until your eyeballs pop out, but we will destroy anything and anyone who offers an alternative to our glass idol. The only thing that remains will be a screen.
I thought so too! My first impression was along the lines of “fitting” all the creativity, photography, art, etc, into a super slim profile.
Idk how it all got so out of hand and making it all seem about ‘destroying’ the good stuff or what not.
I would wager that Apple products are the majority of audio, video and photography producing and/or editing machines.
Seems silly how out of proportion this all went out to be. Even after hearing all this negativity, I can’t see it as a(n) un/intentional portrayal of destroying all the arts..
I am thoroughly confused about how this ad has become the controversy it has become. This whole ordeal feels very "let's invent something to get mad at!"
I would bet a large sum of money that the creatives who created the ad for Apple had no intentions beyond "this ad will be a metaphor for the insane variety of creative endeavors you can use an iPad for!"
Apple isn't tone-deaf. The people mad about this are tone-hallucinating.
> I would bet a large sum of money that the creatives who created the ad for Apple had no intentions beyond "this ad will be a metaphor for the insane variety of creative endeavors you can use an iPad for!"
I think most people—including the author of TFA—would agree with you that that's the conscious thought going through the creators' minds. The problem with the ad isn't that it was an intentional statement of destruction on the part of Apple, it's that the metaphor is a bit too on the nose.
If they'd had all the stuff disappear into a magician's hat and then pulled out an iPad, or turned the iPad into a bag of holding and placed all those items inside (or pulled them all out!), that would have conveyed the happy side of the metaphor without triggering any antipathy.
The anger (and I'd argue, fear) stems from the fact that the metaphor Apple chose has the iPad replacing every other creative endeavor. There's no ambiguity: every other instrument, tool, and object is totally and finally crushed. That hydraulic press left no survivors besides the iPad.
That's what the video conveys, and that's what is triggering a lot of angst among creative people of many different stripes. It's too close to what we all have feared has been happening, now presented in vivid and visceral detail.
Same. I’m hoping the article is a satire piece of some kind but maybe I’m wrong. It’s a clever ad about how an iPad can do a ton of stuff. I’m not sure how you even come away with this world view. It’s like watching a Chick-fil-a ad and concluding they want cows to rule over us as they are in control of our media or something wild
Well I do mostly agree..in this day and age where the earth is not in the best shape and green house gases…I hate seeing people be destructive and wasteful. There are YouTubers who make videos taking brand new things and destroying them or will smash things and I cringe thinking what a waste all this effort and green house gas went into making a product and then they are needlessly destroyed for what? So though I don’t think this ad was meant to be so deep I do think it is cringe they are destroying items for no reason.
To be fair some of those YouTubers are showing what products are not well made and should not be purchased. So sacrificing one isn’t a big deal if people then purchase more durable items.
I don't think it's crazy stereotyping to say that artists have more free time than most of us, simply by the nature of the job and the reality of frequent unemployment. The minority of artists who are either steadily employed in their trade or wildly successful doesn't change that a majority of artists struggle to make ends meet with their art, and spend long stretches without a whole lot to do.
Their mistake was that they forgot that their customers seek approval from their company like children seek approval from their parents. As the ones who encourage (and technically mandate) that desire for approval, they should stick to flattery and praise.
Instead they flattened a number of things other than Apple products that their customers also hang their personalities on (kitsch over-represented.) Instead, they should have just marketed an Apple-branded piano that was only allowed to play Apple-approved songs. Their customers would smash all their old pianos themselves, and feel superior to the left-behind losers who wouldn't.
This is like being upset that the Beatles said they were more popular than Jesus, but for insecure upper-middle-class opinion-worker douchebags.
The uproar we see is projected guilt