Apple's Mistake

Appiah's idea of "a saving truth" was obviously overlooked in the case of the Apple iphone and the $200 price cut that was given to the product, merely two months after it was released for sale. As PR professionals their are certain strongly held beliefs that should not be compromised, such as truth, justice and humanness, to name a few. None of these beliefs were strongly held in the case of the iphone and the dramatic price cut.

First of all the iphone was given so much hype and was only going to be distributed through AT&T. So many loyal Apple consumers switched their cell phone service over to AT&T just so they could be the proud owners of this high tech item. So where exactly was the justice, or righteousness, in lowering the price only after two months? This was not fair to the loyal customers who switched their phones plans just to purchase the Apple iphone. This injustice was what caused the uproar and the chaos just continued to unfold from there.

The second largest mistake Apple made was that their so called "apology" give by CEO Steve Jobs, was one of the most dry, sarcastic and unrealistic apologies ever. In my personal opinion the people who spent the full price on the iphone had every right to be upset and to have felt betrayed by Apple. There was so sympathy or humaneness in the apology that Steve Jobs gave, it seemed more like a stop your whining speech and if that isn't good enough then here take this $100 toward some more Apple merchandise. So where was the humaneness in this? When I read the "apology" from Steve Jobs on the Apple website, I didn't feel any better about people purchasing this phone and then being screwed over.

The third mistake that was made was that the Apple company was not truthful in their price cut. I don't recall reading anything in the paper about Apple making a general announcement that there was going to be a price cut. I mean yes it is a reality that eventually prices will drop, but it is not usual that these prices are dropped within the first two months of distribution. I also find it hard to believe that this was not Apple's plan from the very beginning. This was how Apple was not truthful to their customers, who had a right to know that this was going to happen.

In the long run, it seems very apparent that Apple only cared about themselves in this matter and because of it many of their loyal customers may not continue to be loyal. It is a shame when successful companies like Apple, forget what their vales should be and let go of the "saving truth" that launched them to success in the first place.

Utilitarian or Communitarian... good question

In the Dallas Cowboys article the football team is involved in a major crisis and the way they handled the crisis, in my opinion was not the best way to do it. According to the newspapers there was a fight that broke out between two players, Irvin and McIver, which lead to a deep cut in the throat of McIver. The immediate response that was given from the Dallas Cowboys head coach and the NFL was the that this occurred on accident after the two players were "horsing around." However, this was not the picture that the broadcast and print journalist painted for the community.

According to the article, written by Lambiase and Dempsey, there are two ways to communicate this confrontation to the public. The Cowboys took the utilitarian approach, which was for everyone to keep quite about the situation because that was what was best for the team. However, once the media started receiving inside sources who were telling a different story, the NFL and the head coach found themselves "screwed." Even though, the NFL and the Cowboys were facing skepticism from their community as well as the media they never faltered from their original story, claiming it was all an accident.

As public relations professionals we are supposed to pride ourselves in being the truth tellers and communicators to the public. Grant it every situation, especially delicate situations, must be handled with caution. In my opinion if the Cowboys team kept more of a communitarian approach, which focused more on the well-being of the injured player, as opposed to covering up the story the media would have been more receptive. And then once all the information was gathered and the situation/confrontation was affirmed, they could have expressed that the fight was a result of "horse play," which turned tragic and that both players would be penalized and be forced to sit out during the pre-season game.

If this approach was taken it would have discredited any doubt in the community and it would have shown the Cowboys team to be fair and partial in the sentencing of these two players.

Cosmopolitanism and Public Relations

According to Appiah's model of cosmopolitanism everyone must look outside their own beliefs and morals and take a deeper look into the lives of people different from themselves. By doing so you are able to view more of the world and have a better understanding of the world around you and the people in it.

This is very important in the world of public relations, especially for international PR. In the world of international PR you must understand the culture of the client you represent, which is where cosmopolitanism comes in. You can not effectively perform your job as a PR professional if you do not understand the culture of your client. For instance, you would not attempt to shake hands with a Japanese culture when introducing yourself, instead you would bow. By not taking the time to look into that aspect of the Japanese culture you could cause many communication problems or even possibly offend someone.

Therefore, it is very important to consider Appiahs model of cosmopolitanism in order to make sure you don't make any mistakes and that you are capable of understanding your client.

So who matter's anyway??

According to the cosmopolitan beliefs, everyone matters, at least everyone appears to matter. The catch is that not everyone needs to agree with everyone else. For instance, I am a non-practicing Catholic, there are some things about my religion that I just don't agree with, but I am not going to judge people who are strong following Catholics, just like I do not criticize Jews for practicing their religion.



I believe that every person on earth has a write to be here and that every person needs to feel accepted and loved by society. However, it is a reality that in some religions and some beliefs there are certain people who have more of a "purpose" in society. Even in corporate America there are people who have more power or more significance than others. For instance, lets look at corporate America has a hierarchy, starting from the top and working its way down. You have the "top dogs," such as the chief executive officer, president and/or vice president, etc; then you have the top management, such as general manager, team director, marketing director, etc; then you have the middle management floor manager, supervisor, etc; then the lower level employees, such as the cashier or to-go drivers. All of these people matter in making the business run smoothly, but how many of these people consider where their product or merchandise is coming from... or do they care?

I think it is unfortunate that their are sweat shops in the countries who create the product for American society. Young children sewing, hammering, slaving away for 12 or more hours a day getting no breaks and are paid $.25 a hour is something that expresses my statement earlier that in the eyes of some people these young children just don't matter. I mean without them there would be no product or merchandise to be sold, but the fact that these young children work the hours they do and are paid practically nothing proves that in some peoples eyes they simply do not have as much "status" in society as others. I wonder if it will ever change...