At the risk of sounding like a broken record, these tech bloggers knew that Samsung employed a new technology to allow a plastic OLED screen to bend and one with a proprietary hinge mechanism with no dust/particle or liquid intrusion protection. If the display were transparent aluminum, then pulling what appears to be a screen protector is understandable.
It comes down to personal negligence and not accepting the possibility and possibly responsibility that it was a bonehead mistake. Instead, the situation is allowed to fester for two days creating a hugely overblown crucifixion of Samsung being held to impossibility high standard of perfection. Others were saying it was rushed out to market too soon. Eight plus years of development. Really?
It's only a couple of days later that we find out that, in one case, footage of user error in damaging the screen was on the cutting room floor but a picture to memorialize the event found its way to being published.
In second case, modeling clay was mentioned deep in a blogsite article and the follow up video today, one in which the reviewer threw more shade on Samsung while trying to convince us that he really liked the device.
Everyone makes mistakes, sometimes inadvertently damaging a device. I get that it would be humiliating to admit to millions of subscribers and sponsors for these bloggers to take personal responsibility immediately and not let hyper-partisan tech community fan the flames of controversy.
Let's also keep in mind that these were generation one preproduction units and that there were only what appears to be 100 such units. There is, so far, one unit that could be genuinely defective. That's one percent for those of you keeping score at home.
Unbox Therapy Lew and John Rettinger released another video in which they remarked that it didn't occur to them that there was a need to peel the plastic layer off. In a prior upload, John Rettinger mentioned the warning label on coffee cups. It shouldn't be necessary to warn people about being careful about boiling hot liquids that can cause severe burns. The person injured was negligent and personally responsible. Yet, emotion kicks an unfortunate event into overdrive and McDonald's becomes the villain.
I totally get that my comments may be overblown and incindiary and is flawed being based on my understanding of the sequence of events and timelines surrounding the issues and that I don't have all the facts, only video uploads and blogsite articles. Point is that narratives were being spun by those involved and ostensibly doing CYA to protect reputations and monetization/sponsor funding flows.
Narratives should not drive the story. Only facts should be the determining factor that drives our purchase decision. This is also not to say that Samsung also has a role in the situation by neglecting to provide a warning label in much the same way as McDonald's was forced to when customers have accidents or make mistakes.