Re: Did anyone do some basic fact checking?
My point was about fact checking, NOT about semantics.
The lack of fact checking leads to confusion, such as the majority of people thinking that an iPhone is US-made (or assembled or made from primarily US parts, neither of which is the case.)
How could you possibly know what the author meant, when they clearly said something different?
To drive my point about fact-checking home, and to counter your argument about Toyota, it's VERY EASY (and legally required) to list the percent of a Toyota (or any car) that is US-made - it's right on the window sticker (called the Monroney label) and the percent of US content and the assembly plant must legally both be listed. For example, the Camry has 75% US content, and the final assembly is in the US, so this would be characterised as a US-made car produced by a Japanese company. The Prius has 5% US content and is assembled in Japan, so it would be considered a Japanese-made car produced by a Japanese company.
Again, I trying to point out that the article lacked basic fact-checking (see my example above to counter your Toyota argument.) I was not trying to make a statement about cars or electronics. This lack of fact checking also led to the articles erroneous conclusion about the iPhone being a 'US-made' product being the primary cause of low sales rather than the crackdown on corruption (or possibly a non-marked up version of the iPhone being available in a few weeks.)
My very relevant argument is that the article's point is invalid because of a lack of fact-checking.