[GoodThings2Life]

Yes, it DOES matter.

CNET is, for better or worse, a trusted technology site that millions of people look to for tech news, reviews, and analysis. When you can't trust the reviews to be fair and honest and instead are highly opinionated, then why should they get away with that? If you scroll up a few posts, I linked to an actual CNET article that confirms, yeah, they're biased.

News sites used to adhere to a standard of professionalism and reported facts objectively, not subjectively. It should STILL be that way. I don't care that people have different opinions, but I do care that those opinions are educated versus biased.

So why does that matter? Simple. When everybody thinks that everything Apple or Company X produces is a rose, there is no accountability for that company. Apple could release a product called iPoop and it would literally be a piece of dog feces wrapped in an aluminum case, and people will still buy it as if it's their last meal.

Biased reporting also has a nasty economic consequence. When people are flocking to one product religiously, the prices of that product go up with the demand, good old econ 101. Well, when the competition isn't able to sell as many due to the bias against their products, so they also have no motivation to lower cost (they have to recoup their losses somehow), so they sell a good product at a high price and wonder why they're not selling.

The current posted staff review is now quite favorable, but only because the article has been revised to be more objective. This is the desired result. Now people can read the article and know some factual information about the device and make an informed decision about buying it.