Nokia Apologizes For Misleading Lumia 920 Ad 233
hypnosec writes "During Nokia's press event for the launch of its flagship Windows Phone 8 smartphone — the Lumia 920 — the Finnish company made available some promotional materials wherein there was a video showcasing PureView's main feature: optical image stabilization (OIS) but, it turns out these ads were faked following which Nokia has issued an official apology. In the video was 'a reflection that revealed the footage wasn't shot on a Lumia 920, but a regular camera inside a white van.' If we go to 0:27 of the video, a reflection of a white van keeping pace with the girl is seen whereby a person is holding a DSLR camera. Fast forward to 0:48 of the video and you will clearly see the shadow of a DSLR hooked to the swing. In its apology through a blog post Nokia confirms that the video 'was not shot with a Lumia 920.'"
The damage is already done (Score:5, Insightful)
A better option would have been to avoid publishing misleading ads...
Re:The damage is already done (Score:5, Funny)
OR -
Give away a free DSLR with every phone. I'd probably buy it then.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, just add it to any of the android powered DSLRs currently on the market. And you have so many to choose from. How many android DSLRs are there now? I forget.
Two [dpreview.com].
tl;dr - A Samsung and Nikon point and shoot.
Re: (Score:2)
Hush! *makes use of the confusion that has arisen to call his compact cameras DSLRs*
Re: (Score:2)
OR -
Give away a free DSLR with every phone. I'd probably buy it then.
I dunno. Cell phones are more expensive than many DSLR's these days, until you get into the pro range. I think I'd rather pay for the dslr than a cell phone with windows mobile just to get a paperweight and a dslr.
Re: (Score:3)
What's to deny? The camera is designed to survive being dropped, and it survived being stuck to a motorcylce. The image was shaky because it wasn't mounted to a stedicam and the bike was oscilating further than the sensor or lens elements are able to move. The microphone picked up wind noise because it was windy and being a pocket camera it didn't have a windsock.
If you want good footage and sound in this situation, there's no getting around mounting to a stedicam (or DIY equivalent) and plugging in a shotg
Re: (Score:2)
>>>Makes me wonder how many imaging product ads feature faux footage... and on top of that... why you would bother doing it?
You must be new... to everything. They fake photos of models (airbrushing). They fake photos on covers of food boxes by adding food coloring (to make it look better than it is). Video is no different. Of course it's faked; virtually all advertising is faked.
BTW I've added Nokia to my ever-growing list of boycotted companies:
Nokia
Toyota
Apple
Google
Microsoft
Re: (Score:2)
You dont have a cellphone, do you? Or at the least, we would expect that it was a Palm Pre? (Of course, I might ask why on earth HP wasnt on that list ;P )
Re: (Score:2)
BTW I've added Nokia to my ever-growing list of boycotted companies:
I never boycott some company products, at most I try not to buy products from companies I don't like, but that's it.
Toyota
???
Apple
I never bought Apple hardware, but I habitually use CUPS or WebKit.
Google
Then you should never connect to the Internet.
Re: (Score:2)
A better option would have been stating when the phone was available and on which carrier. The ad is just more Nokia getting it wrong.
Yesterday could've been a great day for them. But trouble comes in threes it seems.
Meanwhile in Executive land (Score:5, Funny)
OR instead you could point out how well Mr. Elop has done turning the ancient dinosaur Nokia into the nimble, most successful Windows phone company, making him a very deserving (of a humongous bonus that is) CEO. He can even take a nice picture of that fat check - shaking with excitement but nonetheless rock solid stabilized - and upload it to Bing (via Facebook). Oooh, the joy!
Re: (Score:2)
As long as he takes that picture with an actual Lumia 920...
Re:The damage is already done (Score:5, Interesting)
A better option would have been to avoid publishing misleading ads...
You are quite right, but as a former Nokia shareholder (got out earlier this year at a big loss) I can assure you that Nokia got into its current woeful state by running out of "better options" some years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously? Take a look for yourself: http://swipe.nokia.com/features/ [nokia.com]
Features, shmeatures. I programmed the poor thing, and I still think it was a failure. It was destined to be half-baked even before the axe fell.
There's a reason the N9 with MeeGo outsold their first batches of WP7 phones, despite its lack of marketing and limited availability.
There are no trustworthy data confirming this.
Re: (Score:2)
Adding a cleaner looking skin to a field of icons isn't innovation, it's (rather boring) design. Smoke and mirrors. There's nothing new in anything that Meego brings to the table except the pictures overlaying the same old paradigm of a field of icons hiding your data from you.
When I have a small portable device, screen space is precious. Don't waste it on a field of icons all in rows. Show me the information I want to see.
Re: (Score:2)
Shame that the only metric that really matters in the market is how well the OS is selling, eh?
Windows Phone is a total failure.
Nokia's woes (Score:5, Interesting)
Why did Nokia end up in this mess?
They had Symbian which made them a lot of money but was getting stale with UX. So Nokia started making a new Linux-based OS, which was called Maemo. Then, for some unknown reason they partnered with Intel and Maemo became Meego.
Meego was getting delayed.
Meanwhile Nokia did publish a Maemo phone, the N900. This was quite an OK phone, and got good reviews. Nokia was back on track.
Enter Stephen Elop as the new CEO. First thing the Microsoft alumni does is destroy the revenue stream from Symbian phones with his burning platform speech. Next thing he does is destroy any hope of any future by killing Meego.
Third thing he does is announce a partnership with Microsoft which means the in-house software development essentially has to cease. At this point Nokia has been beaten to a comatose state. Talent is bleeding out of the company.
Questions: Why did Nokia self-destruct its future? Who did Paul Allen meet in Helsinki on his boat, was this where the deal to trash Nokia was made? What is Shell chairman Jorma Ollila's (ex-Nokia CEO, Nokia chairman of the board) role in all this?
We know the result of all this: Nokia is nearly dead, ready to be given the final rites by Microsoft, which will devour Nokia's patents. Nearly all mobile operating systems are on the hands of a few North American companies. Strategically this makes a lot of sense to the USA, as it is showing a tendency to snoop on everyone's private data regardless of who and where they are. What better way to do this than to control the OS in a device which is with each person almost all the time.
This makes me think the decision to destroy Nokia was in some way dictated by US interests. Why the Finnish government accepted all this is beyond me - they must have gotten something valuable in return.
So what did the Finns get?
One thing I guess they got was a promise to become a big player in the content industry (games) area. Just look at the hype around Rovio and their Angry Birds. I doubt the rise of content industry in a narrow sector would be enough to offset the loss of an entire strategically important R&D cluster. Therefore I think this was not enough.
But what more could it be? Promise to become a member of NATO without "officially" becoming a member of NATO?
Maybe instead of a carrot, a stick was used. But what was the stick?
I am appalled that the Finnish government with the industry movers and shakers have basically eaten popcorn and watched the show without doing anything. Not so many years ago a lot of tax money was constantly funneled into Nokia's research projects. It was the pride of the whole nation, and this was mirrored in the behaviour of the government and the industry. Now the same clowns are watching a whole high-tech cluster vaporize in thin air without doing ANYTHING.
And lo and behold, Samsung will be next.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:The damage is already done (Score:5, Insightful)
It's misleading in the same way that Apple's Siri ads or iPhone ads are: show real capabilities of a technology in an augmented or enhanced manner. As the video posted from the 920 shows, the phone is indeed capable of what they claim. Maybe not as good as the larger prototype they claim they were using in the video, but nonetheless very good.
Wat? They don't claim they were using a "larger prototype", they simply confess that it's not a 920 at all. Compare that to this:
Just as Siri doesn't get right every time [youtube.com] with instantaneous response, and iPhone isn't lightening fast [youtube.com] like in the ads.
But Siri does get it right some of the time, and with a fast enough network connection (like, say, it's connecting to a local server), it could be that fast. Those ads are Siri, albeit Siri at its absolute, unlikely-to-actually-occur-in-reality best. Here, Nokia's not even using a 920 at all. It's not just misleading as in a "shown under optimal conditions" way, but misleading in a "doesn't actually exist at all" way.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They don't claim they were using a "larger prototype", they simply confess that it's not a 920 at all.
I think maybe I read it wrong. They said the images were shot with a prototype and scaled down.
Those ads are Siri, albeit Siri at its absolute, unlikely-to-actually-occur-in-reality best.... Here, Nokia's not even using a 920 at all. It's ... misleading in a "doesn't actually exist at all" way.
How is "unlikely-to-actually-occur-in-reality best" much different or generally less misleading compared to "doesn't actually exist at all"? Nokia 920 has optical image stabilization that improves image quality. This is demonstrated. It's probably not as great as a DSLR but it does what they say. Siri is an AI that responds to voice commands. It doesn't perform exactly like the video but it does what they say. App
Re:The damage is already done (Score:5, Insightful)
You don't see the difference between showing a product in the best available light versus showing video from a professional camera and claiming it came from the phone?
You really don't? Ou think that is in any way equivalent. The Siri ads are like the HTC ads where everyone in the band is using a phone. Could the phone do that? Sure. Would it take optimal conditions that are unlikely to exist on earth today? Sure. The Nokia ad was a lie. He phone could never do that because it wasn't done with the phone.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How is "unlikely-to-actually-occur-in-reality best" much different or generally less misleading compared to "doesn't actually exist at all"? Nokia 920 has optical image stabilization that improves image quality. This is demonstrated.
No, it's not. As Nokia admits, the 920 doesn't have the image stabilization yet. It hasn't been demonstrated, because they haven't even gotten a working prototype. Instead, they faked it.
Siri is an AI that responds to voice commands. It doesn't perform exactly like the video but it does what they say. Apple shows iPhone downloading at faster than network speeds over 3G. Of course it doesn't do it just like that, much slower in fact, but it does what they say.
Again, no... Siri does do what the video says and performs exactly like that, under optimal conditions. If you took an iPhone 4S and had a perfectly silent room with a trained speaker, and an 802.11n connection to a local server to do the decoding and searching, you could get the same results. It certainly doesn't perform l
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not. As Nokia admits, the 920 doesn't have the image stabilization yet. It hasn't been demonstrated, because they haven't even gotten a working prototype.
Sure about that?
Comparison with SGS3 [youtube.com]
OIS and low light demonstration [youtube.com]
OIS demonstration [youtu.be]
If you took an iPhone 4S and had a perfectly silent room with a trained speaker, and an 802.11n connection to a local server to do the decoding and searching, you could get the same results.
If you need that many qualifiers to bring the idealized version to reality, then no, it's not the same. And what about the 3G commercial you seem to be completely bypassing, which is showing a 3G connection working 3x faster than possible? How is that not lying.
Look, I don't even think what Apple is doing in their ads is bad. I think it's fine. They're depicting the function of their product in an idealized setting
Re: (Score:2)
No, it's not. As Nokia admits, the 920 doesn't have the image stabilization yet. It hasn't been demonstrated, because they haven't even gotten a working prototype.
Sure about that?
From their apology:
Of course, hindsight is 20/20, but we should have posted a disclaimer stating this was a representation of OIS only. This was not shot with a Lumia 920. At least, not yet. We apologize for the confusion we created.
That seems to be an admission that it's not yet in product, but I'll concede that maybe they have some sort of prototype. Why didn't they use that, then?
If you took an iPhone 4S and had a perfectly silent room with a trained speaker, and an 802.11n connection to a local server to do the decoding and searching, you could get the same results.
If you need that many qualifiers to bring the idealized version to reality, then no, it's not the same. And what about the 3G commercial you seem to be completely bypassing, which is showing a 3G connection working 3x faster than possible? How is that not lying.
I'm not sure which commercial you're talking about. Got a link?
Look, I don't even think what Apple is doing in their ads is bad. I think it's fine. They're depicting the function of their product in an idealized setting in a dramatized way to demonstrate its capabilities. I get that. I'm fine with that. But I don't see how that is substantially different than depicting the capabilities of OIS in an idealized, dramatized way to demonstrate the capabilities of OIS on the 920.
Critical differ
Re: (Score:2)
And what about the 3G commercial you seem to be completely bypassing, which is showing a 3G connection working 3x faster than possible? How is that not lying.
Ah, found the one you're talking about. There was no mention of "3x faster". Just "really fast" [telegraph.co.uk]. I suppose someone could sit there with a stop watch and time the commercial to complain that sequences were sped up, but then you'd think they'd notice the disclaimer. I also think that someone would be busy complaining about the Jura coffee machine that can pull a thousand shots of espresso in 15 seconds [youtube.com], no?
Re:The damage is already done (Score:4, Informative)
No, it's not. As Nokia admits, the 920 doesn't have the image stabilization yet. It hasn't been demonstrated, because they haven't even gotten a working prototype.
There is another video [youtu.be] that explicitly claims to be demonstrating OIS on Lumia 920.
Re: (Score:2)
It's ideal performance...
The ads were made by Apple, there is no reason to believe that Apple couldn't have such servers local to where the ads were produced, as well as being before siri was released to the general public so they would be under extremely low load.
Similarly, the 3g performance is theoretically capable of being twice as fast, wether it actually is in practice is an entirely different matter. A gigabit ethernet card is 10 times as fast as a 100mb card, but that doesn't mean your internet conn
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Except they didn't lie. We have a separate word for that for a reason - "misleading".
Re: (Score:2)
They may not have lied, but they were certainly being 'economical with the truth'
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
My point was if you want to take down misleading advertising you have a huge task ahead of you. The burger you see in fast food adds doesn't come from a pimply teenager (it's then covered in some camera friendly spray and probably not even the same quality of ingredients).
How could you show two people filming each other without another camera? They could have been demonstrating the effect not the device.
Re: (Score:3)
Not by going "everyone does that, oh no, what can we do about it".
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
A better option would have been to avoid publishing misleading ads...
Like it being PureView, which is only in the 808.
Re: (Score:2)
Let's see, 5 sentences hyping the new product, A long sentence of setup with a bit of hype tossed in, and 2 sentences of apology that minimizes the act they are apologizing for. Then a video hyping the new product.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Its so much easier to just apologize and be regretful if / when you ever get caught.
Re: (Score:2)
Misleading? This is a LIE from MSNokia!
If only they listened to me: I recommend Micro Phone as a trademark. Goes superbly with the other generic words like Windows, Word, Excel, Access, SQL Server... MSNokia! sounds! more! like! a! Yahoo! brand.
Re: (Score:2)
Except these generic words are not trademarked. The trademarks are Microsoft Windows, Microsoft Word, Microsoft Excel, Microsoft Access, Apple, Inc.
No, not a whoosh, I got the joke. Just pointing out a fact.
Re:The damage is already done (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft doesn't make the hardware or the ad. What part of Nokia product don't YOU understand?
Don't kid yourself, Nokia has been a de facto Microsoft subsidiary since Elop became CEO.
Re: (Score:2)
But ads cannot contain outright lies, that's illegal...
They must tell the truth, but they don't tell the whole truth.
If they are attempting to promote a camera, they need to show photos actually taken with that camera and not modified afterwards (without declaring the fact)...
On the other hand, they can set up the lighting and other environmental conditions to ensure they are optimal, and they don't have to declare that in sub optimal conditions the camera would take massively inferior pictures etc.
surprise... (Score:5, Funny)
Advertisement is full of lies. Who'd have thought? Colour me shocked. Shocked, I say!
Re:surprise... (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, in most civilised countries in the world, advertisements CAN'T lie. That's pretty much the problem.
The other side of the coin is whether people THINK something that the advert IMPLIES but doesn't actually say. If you're stupid enough to fall for those tricks, then you really will believe that advertising lies all the time.
That's not to say that lies don't happen. It's just an entirely different kind of "lie" to what the average person would think.
Watching the shopping channels is entertainment on a dull night for no other reason than spotting the holes and flaws in the truths they tell (Do it - assume they are 100% true and then see how they can say those things without telling a lie, it's quite fun to do. Do the same with magicians, psychics, etc. and notice the same tricks happening).
Last night on QVC: "This ceramic frying pan can cook at a hotter heat than any metal pan on the market". Well, yes. It probably can. But I wouldn't EVER cook at those temperatures and surely my gas stovetop or, indeed, my frying pan would melt trying to do that before I need worry about buying a ceramic one".
"This pan wipes clean with one swipe" - yes, it does. Because you've got hot, fresh, watery/oily sauce that you poured onto it just a second ago and a huge tough man scraping a heavy, clean, damp dishcloth over after scraping off the sauce with a metal implement.
"While the traditional non-stick pan is much harder to clean" - no, because the over-smiley female presenter is hardly pushing, with a dry, small, flimsy dishcloth (and no metal implement) on a pre-dried stain of (presumably) the same sauce that probably has been cooked on and dried for hours.
Completely truthful. Absolutely 100% misleading. There's a difference.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
And, of course, the real questions are "what dilution?", "for how long?" and "where?"
Household vinegar is acidic (down to pH 2.4 or even lower). It just matters what dilution you have it in. Do you know what I use to clean the windscreen wipers on my car? Vinegar. I've never once worried about the paint job underneath them melting off because of vinegar.
If I wipe it off (or wash it away, or whatever) quick, I could pour just about anything on there.
And if I do it on a nice, waxed, plain part not near an
Re: (Score:3)
Dihydrogen monoxide is a component of acid rain, and kills thousands of people every year.
100% truthful.
100% misleading.
Re:surprise... (Score:5, Funny)
at least this one has a fit girl on a bike in it. Always a fine sight. I did enjoy the ad from that standpoint.
Disclaimer: i'm one of those cyclists who sometimes slow down in order to not overtake a woman on a bike... if that makes me a dirty old man, so be it.
Re: (Score:2)
It's better to be talked about than not talked about.
Re:surprise... (Score:4, Interesting)
Basically lying in adverts is rife and always will be and I'm kinda surprised Nokia is being dragged through the mud for this when most times advertisers don't even get caught.
Re:surprise... (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm kinda surprised Nokia is being dragged through the mud for this when most times advertisers don't even get caught.
There ya go...the moral of the story (to these douches anyways) is 'don't get caught'.
Re: (Score:2)
Just because it's common doesn't mean it should be. Markets absolutely REQUIRE honesty in order to function. The market can sort out a few bad apples, but when they're nearly all bad, it fails.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Here are 11 hilarious examples of false advertising.
http://www.oddee.com/item_97929.aspx [oddee.com]
Here are 14 False Advertising Scandals That Cost Brands Millions
http://articles.businessinsider.com/2011-09-16/strategy/30164309_1_false-advertising-false-claims-marketing-policies [businessinsider.com]
Everybody should read the WP entry to see if they missed something.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_advertising [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Based on the utterly toothless and loophole ridden crap consumer protection laws, a significant but small percentage. Based on what most reasonable people would call false advertising if asked, at least half with another 25 to 40 percent being borderline.
Say it ain't so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Next you'll be saying that that HTC (?) ad with the fashion photographer jumping out of the plane and doing a photo shoot in free-fall wasn't entirely shot on a smartphone?
What next? I'd been planning on buying a can of Red Bull, sprouting wings, and flying to Holland next week: should I change my travel plans?
Re: (Score:3)
And that the fashion photographer wasn't actually a fashion photographer but a professional skydiver? Say it ain't so!
If the phone can actually do image stabilisation and it's not much worse than what's shown in the ad (regardless of how the ad was produced) then I don't see how this is misleading beyond the fact that it's an advertisement, and thus by definition intentionally misleading. Lies, damned lies, statistics, and advertising...
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Dear Ms. AC:
He didn't say the horse was actually moving. Or even alive.
And from a purely logic standpoint, his first and second sentence can stand alone and have nothing to do with each other.
Thank you,
Your local Ad Council
Re: (Score:2)
If the phone can actually do image stabilisation and it's not much worse than what's shown in the ad (regardless of how the ad was produced) then I don't see how this is misleading beyond the fact that it's an advertisement, and thus by definition intentionally misleading. Lies, damned lies, statistics, and advertising...
There are professional standards, even in advertising. Companies get reprimanded for misleading ads all the time.
The only honourable way out of this for Nokia is to redo the ad with a real Lumia 920. Cherry-pick the best working software snapshot out of a dosen latest, find the best working phone prototype, tweak parameters, but it has to be the real thing. Either they are really confident that actual PureView performance will match the pro-grade video, or this is beyond stupid.
Hard to say... (Score:2)
Either they are really confident that actual PureView performance will match the pro-grade video, or this is beyond stupid.
This is Elop, so it's hard to say. It's certainly an effective way to further erode any trust in the Nokia brand. Now, whether that's intentional or not...
:-P
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> I'd been planning on buying a can of Red Bull, sprouting wings, and flying to Holland next week
Big difference. The claim of "sprouting wings" is so over top that anybody should know that this is just an advertising slogan.
Only a total moron would drink Red Bull and wait for wings to pop out.
Making it look as if something was produced with a device even though the device was not used is a fucking LIE.
Here most people will think that the camera really is that good.
Re:Say it ain't so... (Score:5, Insightful)
Making it look as if something was produced with a device even though the device was not used is a fucking LIE.
Useful cut out and keep guide:
If it is on a TV or Cinema screen or even a still photograph it is a lie.
It's not necessarily about dishonesty - it's about practicality. They use simulated pictures in adverts for TV screens because taking photos/videos of TV screens always looks crap - it's nigh-on impossible to get the exposure/colour balance right even if you don't get interference patterns. They use fake food in commercials because real food looks crap on film (especially after it's been under the lights for an hour or two). Making a film/TV program is too bloody time-consuming and expensive to leave anything to chance for the sake of realism when you can fake it reliably and on cue. Interviews get edited because people going 'um' or repeating themselves looks much worse on screen than it does in real life: if they cut away to the interviewer nodding then it's probably to disguise the 'jump' where they cut out the interviewee saying something unintelligible.
With still pictures, you don't even need Photoshop: you've put a spin on it as soon as you've composed the picture and decided when to press the shutter.
"The camera never lies..." should be on the shortlist of most comprehensively inaccurate aphorisms of all time.
Re: (Score:2)
> I'd been planning on buying a can of Red Bull, sprouting wings, and flying to Holland next week
Big difference. The claim of "sprouting wings" is so over top that anybody should know that this is just an advertising slogan.
Only a total moron would drink Red Bull and wait for wings to pop out.
You'd think that would be the case, but then there's this idiot who sued Pepsi for breach of contract, fraud, misleading advertising, etc, for refusing to award him a Harrier Jet [wikipedia.org] which was shown in their TV ad as being available for 7,000,000 Pepsi Points. IIRC a "just kidding" disclaimer was added to the commercial after this joker tried collecting, long before the case went to court, where the judge thankfully rejected all claims.
What's even more pathetic is that it wasn't just the one idiot, he managed t
Re: (Score:2)
"Next you'll be saying that that HTC (?) ad with the fashion photographer jumping out of the plane and doing a photo shoot in free-fall wasn't entirely shot on a smartphone?"
Next you'll tell me Google faked its Google Glass demo:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uh-liQDE3cM [youtube.com]
Too bad... (Score:2, Interesting)
The camera shots are fake as well [pcgerms.com] as the videos...
Contrast this with the demo for Google Glass (Score:2, Interesting)
Contrast this with the demo for Google Glass -- done live, with multiple people, skydiving.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7TB8b2t3QE
Outline (Score:5, Funny)
great job (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/q/bc?s=NOA3.DE&t=5d&l=on&z=l&q=l&c=
They clearly want to be bought by somebody
Re: (Score:2)
We apologize if your intelligence was insulted... (Score:3, Insightful)
...by such an obvious fake. We promise that in the future, the misleading ads won't be *nearly* as easy to debunk.
Doesn't sound bad (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Unless the commercial explicitly says something like "shot with a real Lumia 920", I really don't see this as a bad sin.
I think the expectation is to do the reverse - I've seen other phone adverts that has "Sequences shortened" or words to that effect at the bottom of the screen, because the phone can't actually do all the things shown in the length of the advert. The main complaint I have seen about this Nokia advert is that they did not disclose that they weren't using the phone when the implication is that they were.
Re: (Score:2)
Not any more fake than all the other ads. (Score:4, Insightful)
Apple's siri commercials are simulated experiences.
Cereal boxes and chocolate bars are made larger in those ads.
Screen images are simulated.
Can you hear me now is not actually talking on his cell phone.
Commercials with toxic "food" (Score:2)
And often food in commercials is faked and not suitable for eating (because of paint, being raw inside etc). Often chocolate is just brown paint, strawberries are painted to have more vidi colors, icecream can be made of "mashed potato covered in motor oil" etc. Commercials have long history of being full of lies and often even reviews of products are fake.
Re: (Score:2)
And often food in commercials is faked and not suitable for eating (because of paint, being raw inside etc). Often chocolate is just brown paint, strawberries are painted to have more vidi colors, icecream can be made of "mashed potato covered in motor oil" etc. Commercials have long history of being full of lies and often even reviews of products are fake.
I remember watching an interview with someone who did a beer commercial. They said that unfortunately they couldn't spend the whole day drinking beer so had to be drinking something that looked the same, because they would be taking shots over and over again.
People looking for something to be angry about (Score:3, Insightful)
Why on earth did anyone expect any of this commercial was shot with an actual Lumina?
Does anyone realize how impractical this is, or even how bad it would look on your HDTV?
Nokia's only mistake here is not putting "Not actual footage. This is a simulation of actual results" disclaimer on the split screen parts.
Re: (Score:2)
My favorite is the ads for TVs that talk about the crisp, clear, and vibrant color while showing you that TV showing said crisp, clear vibrant color video, all shown on your own inferior TV. Yeah, I can really see the difference in that video. That's so amazing!
Re: (Score:2)
I always get a kick out of this too! SEE THE SHARP YELLOWS ON OUR NEW SHARP QUATTRO (up the saturation and put it on a white background with an authoritative nerd-shill)
Re: (Score:2)
I didn't say they didn't do anything wrong. They apologized and well, that should be the end of it. What is amazing is that anyone thought it was actual footage in the first place.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Link (Score:2)
I'm fine with this... (Score:2)
How about actual footage? (Score:2)
What's wrong with actual footage? Seriously, is that so hard to do? Truck companies figured that one out a while back, show a picture of a truck doing something really notable and than in the fine print in the bottom you put "actual demonstration". Makes it all the more impressive.
We're sorry. (Score:5, Interesting)
I can't believe this! (Score:2)
Using non-genuine techniques and materials in advertisements to make products more appealing!? What is the world coming to! Why can't Nokia be more like fast food industry, where all vegetables rolling across the screen are as fresh and dew-covered as the ones we get in our burgers; or more like the deodorant industry, which clearly demonstrates the female-attracting effects of a man on a horse; or beer commercials where anything is possible! For shame Nokia, for shame!
Re: (Score:2)
for the brits among you, there's a fantastic skit along just these lines in the latest episode of The Revolution Will Be Televised, which was on last night on BBC3
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You would think a company that is on the verge of dying would be a little more customer focused.
Re: (Score:2)
Any company that cuts user options because it would defile design is a douchbag in my book. Form should follow function, not the other way around. These devices are tools, not art.
This kinda explains the dismal failure of iPhone. Oh wait...
Re: (Score:2)
They were selling speakers... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O58MvTWAI_M [youtube.com]