> You wouldn't even be commenting on this if Microsoft [were] unfairly framed.

Yes, I would, and that's actually one of the problematic parts of the Foxconn reporting - they make components for Microsoft and many other companies, but for some reason coverage focuses on just one of their clients, Apple.

Foxconn's working conditions are indeed harsh by developed-world standards, and I'd happily pay a bit more for a phone in order to improve them. At the same time, I can acknowledge that working for Foxconn is likely better than the subsistence farming of the Mao days, and that Foxconn is probably fairly similar to other companies in China doing similar work.

Perhaps you would give your attention to this if it were Microsoft, but about 90% of the people here would not. So, my point is - if Apple, as the single most profitable venture that uses slave labor, is sacrificed for getting attention on this topic, what does it matter?

Why nitpick the journalism when there is a much larger issue at stake? Besides that - Apple is the most profitable company in the world. People look at them as an example. So, I think it's perfectly fair that journalists target them.