So true, it's how the news works now. When I was a journalist, we'd stress out over trying to write something that got picked up by biggest organizations. It's how the game is played now, from the writer to the editor.

This latest round of iPhone on Verizon mess comes from Bloomberg. Every new article you see is actually a retransmition of the original Bloomberg article, not an original, not a corroboration. It's simply a reprint.

Bloomberg originally interviewed a man named John Hodulik, who works for a company called UBS AG. UBS AG is a "diversified global financial services company" according to their own site.

That means, a company that makes money on the worldwide stock market is saying that Verizon will sell an iPhone. N...
(continues)

You know, if this information that I posted came from a supermarket tabloid or some off the wall radio station, I would say you were probably right. We're talking about USA TODAY and CBS, folks. I cannot believe they would not check their sources and verify FIRST before airing and printing this information.

I know you've been disappointed on several occasions, but you guys are going to have an omelet on your face, let alone one egg, when the CDMA iPhone hits at the specified time. Like I said, I'm taking all of this at face value. I have a sense this time, no one is blowing smoke.

Now, I just can't wait for someone to make a sarcastic retort. I've said my piece. Enough.

no sarcasitc retort, only stateing a fact A CDMA Iphone would suck, now a CDMA/LTE Iphone would be worth considering, but again like i said before it doesn't make Fiscal sence to release it in January.

They are reposting the release from Bloomburg, nothing more, nothing less. they said in the article YOU posted that they couldn't confirm ANYTHING in the article. So no, they didn't fact check.

the freaking WALL STREET JOURNAL convinced everyone verizon was getting the phone in July. Guess what didn't happen? They also said Verizon was getting the ipad at launch. Again, this didn't happen. and the WSJ isn't a "tabloid" either.

And remember, most "reputable" news sites also thought the iphone leak early this year (the qizmodo fiasco) was an intentional leak, proving they understand NOTHING about the tech industry.

i think Cnet said it best

"Someone who said they know something, is saying this is going to happen. That's all we know" 🤣

But, they thought is was a leak because that's how Steve Jobs likes to play.

No it's exactly NOT how steve jobs likes to play.

Steve jobs is a control freak, and hates it when ANYTHING about the company is scooped before he officially announces it.

A "leak" that a new phone is coming is one thing. The fact that one of the actual devices was opened for the world to see WEEKS before the announcement is not.

Not only did this kill their sales of 3gs devices a lot earlier than expected (so more inventory that wasn't moving) but it meant that someone OTHER than him was in control of the press.

Verizon is more likely to make service free than steve jobs is to release one of his products before he intends to.

Well, fair. But a guy who like to play the "Insider leak" thing ALL THE TIME is asking for a little doubt when a critical leak actually happens.
For all anyone knew then, the announcement could have came within a couple weeks, like with the iPad. And having someone have one out in the world before announcement seems suspicious.

Back on the beaten horse topic, though. There have been no announcements, no leaks, no phones left at bars to support this.
This isn't the first time news sources used other news sources to inflate their legitimacy. The facts, as known, are wait until at LEAST 2012.

I agree with Epik, it is pure manipulation of stock by people who have vested interest. It is done on Wall St. everyday.