Consumer Reports reviews lots of products. They create a list of "recommended" ones, and a rate each product based on functionality, how well it works, how must it costs, and other things. When the iPhone 4 released, they were the ones who brought the most attention to the antenna situation. They said they "couldn't recommend the phone." To note, they gave it a very high rating. It became a big media frenzy and Apple explained, in detail, how they [Apple] viewed the situation and gave everyone a free case for their phone. Consumer Reports still, after all that, didn't give the phone a "recommended" stamp of approval.
Then a few weeks ago, the Verizon iPhone released. Consumer Reports came out with another review of the unit. Still, they were intentional to not give the phone a "recommended rating."
Many speculate that they only do this because they are losing respect for their reviews to many of the gadget blogging sites and this is a way to get page views and readers. Some say they are doing it because they are sticking it to the man. (How much has our world changed now that Apple is "the man"?)
I say they are doing it because they forgot to go to journalism school.
Shouldn't product reviews be mostly unbiased?
Whatever the case, they ought to fire their writers, editorial, and leadership because I haven't seen droves of iPhone customers returning their phones.
Instead, you know what I see? Droves of iPhone customers evangelizing about the product.
How persistent can they be? They're a bunch of idiots.