Nikon needs to work on their public relations and marketing tactics

[MissionMan]

Firstly this:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/bu...-a7946111.html

And then decides to do this and in doing so insults a number of ex-Nikon users who will probably never return:

http://www.fujirumors.com/nikon-mana...l-frame-trend/

[Lance B]

Well, the first one was fake news. Nikon (NINOY) said in a statement that it wanted to "thank the community for raising this and challenging us."

"Unfortunately, the female photographers we had invited for this meet were unable to attend, and we acknowledge we have not put enough of a focus on this area," it added.

Typical lazy armchair cut and paste journalism. A real journalist of yore would first check with Nikon as to the whole story behind why there were no women in the photo to which they would have received their answer, "We did invite women but they were unable to attend". End of story. However, that isn't enough for those from the outrage "industry", "don't let the truth ruin a good story", is probably their mantra. The problem is that they knew they would get huge hits with such a topic and most fell for the bait. So, we now have news which is not real, "fake news" as they now say. Have they retracted their statement now that the truth has come out? Too late, the damage is done.

[MissionMan]

Well, the first one was fake news. Nikon (NINOY) said in a statement that it wanted to "thank the community for raising this and challenging us."

"Unfortunately, the female photographers we had invited for this meet were unable to attend, and we acknowledge we have not put enough of a focus on this area," it added.

Typical lazy armchair cut and paste journalism. A real journalist of yore would first check with Nikon as to the whole story behind why there were no women in the photo to which they would have received their answer, "We did invite women but they were unable to attend". End of story. However, that isn't enough for those from the outrage "industry", "don't let the truth ruin a good story", is probably their mantra. The problem is that they knew they would get huge hits with such a topic and most fell for the bait. So, we now have news which is not real, "fake news" as they now say. Have they retracted their statement now that the truth has come out? Too late, the damage is done.

Sorry, I disagree. Most of the press has slayed Nikon for their poor "weak" response to this and I fail to see how this was poor reporting. Some people have even tried to justify it saying that Japanese culture is inherantly sexist.

It was a poor excuse from Nikon. Statistically speaking it is an anomoly that every female they invited happened to be busy. Out of 32 people they found none? Zero? How many females did they invite? One?

[Lance B]

Well sorry, it was poor reporting, typical social media jumping to conclusions without knowing the facts. On Fred Miranda forums, one member there knew one of the photogs that was invited and the reason many of the women photogs didn't go was because partners weren't invited and thus the women declined to go. Unfortunately, the thread was pulled because Fred Miranda forums forbids politically driven threads. The fact of the matter is, you don't know why the women invited didn't turn up and it was obviously out of Nikon's control. The point is, these media outlets are trying to play this for all it's worth TO GET HITS and thus get the gullible social justice warriors to make comment and inflame an otherwise innocent situation. Typical gutter press and social media garbage.

Welcome to the new form of totalitarianism, the "moral crusaders" who peruse the internet etc, like the Brownshirts of Nazi Germany or the NKVD of Russia under Stalin, making sure that you think the way that they want you to. Otherwise wear the wrath of those that believe they are the only ones who have the "right morals" and use bullying tactics to get their way and scare those that disagree into submission. So hypocritical.

Yes, a marketing blunder for sure, but we now know that women were invited but couldn't or didn't want to go. They may have decided to do some paid work instead, whereas the men saw an opportunity to have a free lunch and get their photo "out there" for free publicity. They could then say to their clients, "Hey, I was invited to the Nikon D850 launch, I must be a good photographer". Maybe these guys were looking for work and getting their mug into the photo gets them some free publicity. The women they asked, on the other hand, were possibly in such demand that they didn't have the time to attend or didn't need the exposure - so to speak. Someone said on another forum that they know someone who was invited to the D850 launch, but as partners weren't invited, the women asked decided not to attend. There you go, all sorts of reasons just none of those that were jumped to by the social warriors.

Unfortunately, there are those that are quick to pass judgement and in cases like this take the moral high ground and look outraged to try make themselves look good to the rest of the world. Doesn't matter whether there is any truth to the story, as it's an easy way to be seen to be doing something with minimal to no effort whilst women in many parts of the world who are suffering real oppression are not assisted in any way by these lazy so-called "moral crusaders".

Anyway, we know your desire to stick the boot into Nikon at every opportunity whether justified or not and in this case it was not.

[MissionMan]

Well sorry, it was poor reporting, typical social media jumping to conclusions without knowing the facts. On Fred Miranda forums, one member there knew one of the photogs that was invited and the reason many of the women photogs didn't go was because partners weren't invited and thus the women declined to go. Unfortunately, the thread was pulled because Fred Miranda forums forbids politically driven threads. The fact of the matter is, you don't know why the women invited didn't turn up and it was obviously out of Nikon's control. The point is, these media outlets are trying to play this for all it's worth TO GET HITS and thus get the gullible social justice warriors to make comment and inflame an otherwise innocent situation. Typical gutter press and social media garbage.

Welcome to the new form of totalitarianism, the "moral crusaders" who peruse the internet etc, like the Brownshirts of Nazi Germany or the NKVD of Russia under Stalin, making sure that you think the way that they want you to. Otherwise wear the wrath of those that believe they are the only ones who have the "right morals" and use bullying tactics to get their way and scare those that disagree into submission. So hypocritical.

Yes, a marketing blunder for sure, but we now know that women were invited but couldn't or didn't want to go. They may have decided to do some paid work instead, whereas the men saw an opportunity to have a free lunch and get their photo "out there" for free publicity. They could then say to their clients, "Hey, I was invited to the Nikon D850 launch, I must be a good photographer". Maybe these guys were looking for work and getting their mug into the photo gets them some free publicity. The women they asked, on the other hand, were possibly in such demand that they didn't have the time to attend or didn't need the exposure - so to speak. Someone said on another forum that they know someone who was invited to the D850 launch, but as partners weren't invited, the women asked decided not to attend. There you go, all sorts of reasons just none of those that were jumped to by the social warriors.

Unfortunately, there are those that are quick to pass judgement and in cases like this take the moral high ground and look outraged to try make themselves look good to the rest of the world. Doesn't matter whether there is any truth to the story, as it's an easy way to be seen to be doing something with minimal to no effort whilst women in many parts of the world who are suffering real oppression are not assisted in any way by these lazy so-called "moral crusaders".

Anyway, we know your desire to stick the boot into Nikon at every opportunity whether justified or not and in this case it was not.

I apologise for offending your sensitive soul. I will try not to post anything negative about Nikon lest I offend your sacred camera god.

Ah, but hold on, someone pointed out only about 10% of Nikon's workforce is female? Am I allowed to post that or would that be too offensive for your delicate soul to handle?

That poor reporting made it to many other sources who stuck the boot in, but I guess you only want the positives out of this? On that note, if there were females working on the campaign wouldn't you have expected someone to point out the all male audience? or perhaps they were brushed under the carpet for their negativity like you did. Ah, nothing to see here, fake news. The lady in this case reiterates that as a female photographer, she continually finds herself sidelined, much in the same way that nikon sidelined females. But don't worry, nothing to see here. Time to get the head back in the sand.

https://www.theguardian.com/artandde...y-camera-women

[swifty]

Ermmm, it is very possible that there were very few female ambassadors invited by virtue of the gender ratio being heavily skewed towards male photographers across the industry.
Had a quick look at the Fuji X site and of the first 100 photographers, there were 5 females.
I don't have the time to count the entire database but let's say the female ambassadors make up 10%. If Nikon invite 50 ambassadors (5 females maybe) and 18 couldn't make it, it might well be possible that the 5 females were in the 18 that couldn't make it.
We don't know who they invited or how many rejected so you have to make a lot of assumptions to arrive at a conclusion.

And with regards to the comments by Goto, I've seen a number of translations now that are all different. You have a Chinese interviewer talking to a Japanese man so to get to the English version, it needs to be translated at least twice. In addition you do know how nuanced and contextual the Japanese language is.
No doubt Goto sounds a bit arrogant which IMO is in bad taste.
But check the sources and see how accurate the reporting is that you are reacting to. And are you aware of what role Goto plays at Nikon now?

[arthurking83]

....

It was a poor excuse from Nikon. Statistically speaking it is an anomoly that every female they invited happened to be busy. Out of 32 people they found none? Zero? How many females did they invite? One?

I think it would have been better for Nikon to have just forced that one woman photographer to cancel all her prior commitments and do as Nikon says .. or else!



Seriously?

I mean all this stupid nonsense re women, no women etc .. it's just getting beyond a joke!

What about all the macan photographers out there! Why aren't they being reported as being discriminated against too?
How many monkeys were invited? I bet none .. at all! .. not one like the women may have got .. but zero, zilch, nada, nothing, zip!!!
Stop the presses; news scoop .. world about to end because Nikon didn't invite any macans to showcase the D850.

Truth is no one other than the Nikon head honchos involved know the details about who was invited and who wasn't and who accepted or not.

Like Lance said stupid news .. fake, or simply a beat up. No one really cares .. except the anti Nikon zealots.

I just had a quick peek at Nikons ambassador numbers.
32 in the US, 8 women (30%)
13 in the UK, 4 women (32.5%)
4 in Aus, 0 women .. disgraceful!
4 in Europe, 0 women .. even more disgraceful considering they're much more liberal when it comes to gender equality.
That I can find there is only 1 person listed as Middle East/Africa ambassador. That's a bloke.

So lets say an average of about 31% women in their ambassadorship circles, when there are more than 5 ambassadors in a given region.
That's a fair bit more than MM's hypothetical 1 (woman) in 32 invites. That would equate to only 3%.
I think it'd be safe to assume that the invitees would have been ambassadors .. and not just any Tom, Dick or Henrieta!

I can't find out much info on the Nikon Asia ambassadors list. There's only one chap listed. There is a photo of a group of people which I assume is their ambassador group shot. 3 of those people appear to be Nikon execs.
The rest plain clothed. Of the 15 plain clothed people that could be Nikon Asia ambassadors, 8 are women. Make that a rounded 50%, even tho we know it's more than that for Nikon Asia.

Lets have a look at some other numbers tho .. so we'll poke a stick at Fuji instead, see how that goes

Just had a quick browse of their X-Men .. I mean X-Photographers list. (It really should be called X-Men .. as the numbers are so one sided there!)
Out of the 430 listed people, a massive 39 of them are women. That's 9% .. even Nikon haven't stooped to such heavily slanted gender numbers .. they may be at 30-ish percent generally, and potentially more(if Asia distorts the numbers)
(number are hard to verify tho).

If you want to report a news worthy item .. how about why women photographers are so under represented by Fuji as their leading figure heads?


As for the link to the Fuji site re the comment about pros don't shoot Fuji .. it's pretty much dead on. I've never seen pros at the Olympics or Football(Aussie rules or any other football) .. Soccer, or any other world class sport shooting anything other than Nikon or Canon.
The vast majority of those types of pros will shoot Nikon and Canon for one BIIIG reason .. those big lenses!
I remember a statistic from a while back just after or during the Olympics .. 70% of camera usage at the Olympics in Brazil was Canon .. Canon could even argue that no one uses Nikon professionally(in a manner of speaking!) either!
I'd dare say that something got lost in the translation which got befuddled by translation, and was once again turned into a massive over reaction by those same anti Nikon zealots!

[MissionMan]

I think it would have been better for Nikon to have just forced that one woman photographer to cancel all her prior commitments and do as Nikon says .. or else!



Seriously?

I mean all this stupid nonsense re women, no women etc .. it's just getting beyond a joke!

What about all the macan photographers out there! Why aren't they being reported as being discriminated against too?
How many monkeys were invited? I bet none .. at all! .. not one like the women may have got .. but zero, zilch, nada, nothing, zip!!!
Stop the presses; news scoop .. world about to end because Nikon didn't invite any macans to showcase the D850.

Truth is no one other than the Nikon head honchos involved know the details about who was invited and who wasn't and who accepted or not.

Like Lance said stupid news .. fake, or simply a beat up. No one really cares .. except the anti Nikon zealots.

I just had a quick peek at Nikons ambassador numbers.
32 in the US, 8 women (30%)
13 in the UK, 4 women (32.5%)
4 in Aus, 0 women .. disgraceful!
4 in Europe, 0 women .. even more disgraceful considering they're much more liberal when it comes to gender equality.
That I can find there is only 1 person listed as Middle East/Africa ambassador. That's a bloke.

So lets say an average of about 31% women in their ambassadorship circles, when there are more than 5 ambassadors in a given region.
That's a fair bit more than MM's hypothetical 1 (woman) in 32 invites. That would equate to only 3%.
I think it'd be safe to assume that the invitees would have been ambassadors .. and not just any Tom, Dick or Henrieta!

I can't find out much info on the Nikon Asia ambassadors list. There's only one chap listed. There is a photo of a group of people which I assume is their ambassador group shot. 3 of those people appear to be Nikon execs.
The rest plain clothed. Of the 15 plain clothed people that could be Nikon Asia ambassadors, 8 are women. Make that a rounded 50%, even tho we know it's more than that for Nikon Asia.

Lets have a look at some other numbers tho .. so we'll poke a stick at Fuji instead, see how that goes

Just had a quick browse of their X-Men .. I mean X-Photographers list. (It really should be called X-Men .. as the numbers are so one sided there!)
Out of the 430 listed people, a massive 39 of them are women. That's 9% .. even Nikon haven't stooped to such heavily slanted gender numbers .. they may be at 30-ish percent generally, and potentially more(if Asia distorts the numbers)
(number are hard to verify tho).

If you want to report a news worthy item .. how about why women photographers are so under represented by Fuji as their leading figure heads?


As for the link to the Fuji site re the comment about pros don't shoot Fuji .. it's pretty much dead on. I've never seen pros at the Olympics or Football(Aussie rules or any other football) .. Soccer, or any other world class sport shooting anything other than Nikon or Canon.
The vast majority of those types of pros will shoot Nikon and Canon for one BIIIG reason .. those big lenses!
I remember a statistic from a while back just after or during the Olympics .. 70% of camera usage at the Olympics in Brazil was Canon .. Canon could even argue that no one uses Nikon professionally(in a manner of speaking!) either!
I'd dare say that something got lost in the translation which got befuddled by translation, and was once again turned into a massive over reaction by those same anti Nikon zealots!

Ah, my mistake. Only sports photographers are pro's. I forgot that was the only photographic genre that exists. And the guy giving the interview? Ah, yeah, he was responsible for building the DF, a camera that was such a failure that they never made a second iteration, he's exactly the kind of person that should be driving comments about Nikon's strategy.

The funny part is if someone else posted this, you probably would have responded differently but all of you got on the defensive about the topic, not because of what it was about, but because who posted it.

So let's get back to the topic. You guys were happy to bash the crap out of Sony with every conceivable reason why the A9 wouldn't work, would never be pro, the battery life was crap, despite having never actually used one and anyone who said otherwise was wrong. And worse yet, you justified the sexism that exists within that culture by saying it's okay for Nikon to do this because "no one else is really trying". Even Nikon admitted they didn't try hard enough, but you're somehow defending them. I know women who were offended by this because their response was that if the problem is so ingrained that no one actually noticed and thought there was nothing wrong, that highlights the extend of the problem.

And not surprisingly I got a one page response from you.

[Lance B]

I apologise for offending your sensitive soul. I will try not to post anything negative about Nikon lest I offend your sacred camera god.

Ah, but hold on, someone pointed out only about 10% of Nikon's workforce is female? Am I allowed to post that or would that be too offensive for your delicate soul to handle?

That poor reporting made it to many other sources who stuck the boot in, but I guess you only want the positives out of this? On that note, if there were females working on the campaign wouldn't you have expected someone to point out the all male audience? or perhaps they were brushed under the carpet for their negativity like you did. Ah, nothing to see here, fake news. The lady in this case reiterates that as a female photographer, she continually finds herself sidelined, much in the same way that nikon sidelined females. But don't worry, nothing to see here. Time to get the head back in the sand.

https://www.theguardian.com/artandde...y-camera-women

LOL. I think the one which has had their sensitive soul touched is you as you have decided to take offence at the lack-of-female-photographers-at-the-Nikon-photo-shoot as a cover for your real reason for being upset and that is the second part of your "beef with Nikon" which is with the Nikon President's assertion that Fuji was not for pro's. That must have hit really a nerve. Your reference to Nikon as being "your sacred camera god" is another weak attempt to denigrate. Nice try though. If it were ANY product I would say the same thing, it has nothing to to with the fact it is Nikon, that is just your assertion to try to deflate the argument and try to win cheap points.

The problem with the link you provided is that it is the same issue with the so-called lack of women at the Nikon press release. In other words, it IS fake news, the woman is talking about the lack of women at the press release but the women photogs asked to attend chose not to turn up. This is quite beyond Nikon's control when deadlines have to be met. And, what is the agenda REALLY behind Evelyn Hocksteins article? Who put her up to it? Another site looking for hits to feed the outraged social media industry? I really don't see what Nikon could have done, unless they went out in the street and picked some random women to "fill the quota" of women in the photo. If they didn't want to come, maybe they could have kidnapped them? Now THAT would have been condescending and demeaning. People need to get over it. As I said, typical lazy journalism, lazy outrage for the outrage industry for the social media types to feed on like piranhas and thus get HITS on their site. The funny thing, they all fell for it.

As for women ambassadors for Nikon, have you looked at their site? Looks like they have quite a number:
http://www.nikonusa.com/en/learn-and...ors/index.page

[arthurking83]

Ah, my mistake. Only sports photographers are pro's. I forgot that was the only photographic genre that exists. And the guy giving the interview? Ah, yeah, he was responsible for building the DF, a camera that was such a failure that they never made a second iteration, he's exactly the kind of person that should be driving comments about Nikon's strategy ....

So what you're saying is that your version of the term professional photographer is the only important one that should exist? That the term professional has to also mean the same thing to Nikon too?
Good one, I'll contact Nikon to alert them to their error!
Has it ever occurred to you that Nikon probably don't care what you're perspective on many topics are. Hard as that may be for you to accept, I think it may be time you did.
It's obvious you want Nikon to fail, so let Nikon die the slow death you want them too, and be happy that they ignored your advice.

.... The funny part is if someone else posted this, you probably would have responded differently but all of you got on the defensive about the topic, not because of what it was about, but because who posted it.

Modesty is obviously one of your salient qualities.
Bunk news is bunk news no matter who posts it. Sensationalism is still sensationalism. I'm quite confident that had the Dalai Lama posted that same thread, my responses would have probably been identical.

.... So let's get back to the topic. You guys were happy to bash the crap out of Sony with every conceivable reason why the A9 wouldn't work, would never be pro, the battery life was crap, despite having never actually used one and anyone who said otherwise was wrong ....

The problem is the same as always .. some new kid on the block comes out blazing with all barrels firing and shooting off how great they are .. 20fps and all that jazz .. but you read the fine print and it's all smoke and mirrors!
And it was simply pointed out that where those uber claims had caveats attached with them that don't exist on a real pro camera. No one really cares for a product if it's restricted and comes with a total lack of additional peripheral products to go with it. ie. lenses!

.... I know women who were offended by this because their response was that if the problem is so ingrained that no one actually noticed and thought there was nothing wrong, that highlights the extend of the problem....

Tell them that their choice is made easier for them now .. switch to Fuji .. obviously Fuji think that women are only 9% as capable as 'X-Men' are, so the more women that join the Fuji family, the less likely Fuji will be uncovered to be sexist !

[swifty]

Staying on topic? Maybe you can leave your grudge match with the other forum members behind from other threads. What does the A9 have to do with anything posted?

You can't seem to differentiate between a critical response and a defensive response.
No, it's not because you posted it. It's about the content posted and the limited things you draw from it.

There's inequality in sexes for Nikon ambassadorship.
It's a numbers game and Nikon got caught with their pants down for the D850 launch. But yes, it does highlight the inequality. Should we look further at the industry or stop at Nikon. What's your response to the seeming inequality across the industry?

In the second article, what exact part are you insulted by? Have you considered the context of the interview?
It's a remarkably candid interview, going into detail of his personal Df and with admissions of failure (Df sales) that you rarely see in the Japanese culture.
What I got is the piece is largely his personal opinion and your link was to an opinion piece of seemingly an opinion piece by one of the more sensational rumours websites (personal opinion).
And Goto's retired from his previous key decision making role and it's unclear what sorts of influence he exerts now. One also has to separate his personal preferences to what advice he might offer professionally.
The best you can get out of the interview is probably a glimpse at the personal opinion of one of the decision makers at Nikon when DSLRs were king. Kinda explains his arrogance.
And I dare say he might only be referring to the sports and journalism market when he talks about the pro market. Of course that would be narrow minded but given Nikon (and Canon) times their flagship cameras to coincide with just before the Olympics it seems sports is a pretty big deal at Nikon.

Point being, it's a (more than once) translated article. You haven't seen the video. Even if you have, it might take a native Chinese and Japanese speaker to understand all the nuances. So what are you concluding from the piece?

[MissionMan]

Staying on topic? Maybe you can leave your grudge match with the other forum members behind from other threads. What does the A9 have to do with anything posted?

You can't seem to differentiate between a critical response and a defensive response.
No, it's not because you posted it. It's about the content posted and the limited things you draw from it.

There's inequality in sexes for Nikon ambassadorship.
It's a numbers game and Nikon got caught with their pants down for the D850 launch. But yes, it does highlight the inequality. Should we look further at the industry or stop at Nikon. What's your response to the seeming inequality across the industry?

In the second article, what exact part are you insulted by? Have you considered the context of the interview?
It's a remarkably candid interview, going into detail of his personal Df and with admissions of failure (Df sales) that you rarely see in the Japanese culture.
What I got is the piece is largely his personal opinion and your link was to an opinion piece of seemingly an opinion piece by one of the more sensational rumours websites (personal opinion).
And Goto's retired from his previous key decision making role and it's unclear what sorts of influence he exerts now. One also has to separate his personal preferences to what advice he might offer professionally.
The best you can get out of the interview is probably a glimpse at the personal opinion of one of the decision makers at Nikon when DSLRs were king. Kinda explains his arrogance.
And I dare say he might only be referring to the sports and journalism market when he talks about the pro market. Of course that would be narrow minded but given Nikon (and Canon) times their flagship cameras to coincide with just before the Olympics it seems sports is a pretty big deal at Nikon.

Point being, it's a (more than once) translated article. You haven't seen the video. Even if you have, it might take a native Chinese and Japanese speaker to understand all the nuances. So what are you concluding from the piece?

My point with the interview is simple. It’s dangerous ground to be treading because:

a) It insults those who might have switched due to Nikon’s failed strategy so rather than admitting blame for the failure that is bleeding their customer base.
b) It is insulting to those professionals who are not using full frame (and there are many).

Now, some could argue that maybe there is some truth, but the questions you have to ask yourself when you make a statement like this is:

1. What do you have to gain from it?
2. Is it likely to improve your customer base?
3. Is it likely to make people return to your customer base that have left?
4. Are you potentially alienating ex-customers with statements like this?

To me personally, all of those above statements should reflect something which is likely to increase your customer base. His statements do nothing but have a negative impact. By making a broad statement like this, there is zero likelihood you will retrieve ex-customers. It simply comes across as arrogance and/or a lack of understanding of your customer base. To me, that is a marketing failure in line with Steve Ballmer’s idiotic statements about the iPhone and iPad. It was a failure to understand the way the market is moving which ultimately cost them a substantial amount of market share. They lost the phone market war completely and they could a big dent in their tablet market until they ultimately rectified.

[ricktas]

"Nikon needs to work on their public relations and marketing tactics ".

Replace "Nikon" with just about any major company... or even government. Even the USA has not had a female president yet. Australia only got their first seven short years ago. Gender inequality still exists right around the world, it is improving but it still has a way to go. Nikon is not alone there. However as pointed out Nikon invited women, they just declined the invitation. Not a lot Nikon can do about that. I declined an invitation to a BBQ this weekend because I have another commitment. Is that the host's fault?

Not being good at Japanese, I don't know if these names are male or female: http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/a...ves/index.html or these: https://www.bloomberg.com/research/s...ivcapId=763812 But I would guess that at least 80% are most likely male. If I had time, I would google each one individually and find out what gender they were to give a more precise figure.

Or perhaps this: https://www.channelnews.com.au/fujif...nting-scandal/

My point, no company is without issues.

Your issues with Nikon are well known MissionMan, after all you have expressed your views quite frequently. But I wonder if your own personal distaste for Nikon is now seeing you trying to get people to reconsider their own Nikon ownership? Holding all this negativity towards Nikon is not doing you any favours. There a lot of implications for negativity, and the only person they affect is the one grappling with it. Grab your Fuji, go take some photos and think positively... and let Nikon owners do the same.. and please stop playing the 'victim'. "Nikon are bad, Nikon did the wrong thing by me" / "I swapped to Fuji and love them, but you are all hating on me for it" / "You all attacked my views on the A9"... I think you need some positivity in your life for a change.

[MissionMan]

"Nikon needs to work on their public relations and marketing tactics ".Replace "Nikon" with just about any major company... or even government. Even the USA has not had a female president yet. Australia only got their first seven short years ago. Gender inequality still exists right around the world, it is improving but it still has a way to go. Nikon is not alone there. However as pointed out Nikon invited women, they just declined the invitation. Not a lot Nikon can do about that. I declined an invitation to a BBQ this weekend because I have another commitment. Is that the host's fault?Not being good at Japanese, I don't know if these names are male or female: http://www.fujifilmholdings.com/en/a...ves/index.html or these: https://www.bloomberg.com/research/s...ivcapId=763812 But I would guess that at least 80% are most likely male. If I had time, I would google each one individually and find out what gender they were to give a more precise figure.Or perhaps this: https://www.channelnews.com.au/fujif...nting-scandal/My point, no company is without issues. Your issues with Nikon are well known MissionMan, after all you have expressed your views quite frequently. But I wonder if your own personal distaste for Nikon is now seeing you trying to get people to reconsider their own Nikon ownership? Holding all this negativity towards Nikon is not doing you any favours. There a lot of implications for negativity, and the only person they affect is the one grappling with it. Grab your Fuji, go take some photos and think positively... and let Nikon owners do the same.. and please stop playing the 'victim'. "Nikon are bad, Nikon did the wrong thing by me" / "I swapped to Fuji and love them, but you are all hating on me for it" / "You all attacked my views on the A9"... I think you need some positivity in your life for a change.

Sorry Rick, the point of this thread was to highlight the double standards of these members who go involved in this thread. I knew exactly who would get involved, because they always do, let’s call them the Nikon clan, a little boys club of Nikon who band together to defend everything Nikon and attach everything not-Nikon. So, I thought I’d throw out something that involved sexism in the industry, and problem that most of us are well aware, something we know exists. I knew they would defend Nikon because they always do, and yet we know the reality is Nikon (like most of the other companies) would not have invited many, if any females. We know the region is sexist across all industries. The truth of course is I could have posted something about Nikon’s use of slave labour and they would have found a reason to defend it based on slave labour being an acceptable industry practice.

And yet, it was the Nikon fans involved in this post who are the same people who pulled apart Sony during the A9 thread, finding any and every reason to pull a camera for every conceivable reason despite never having touched it, seen it or used it. Like it or not, it was a major leap in the camera race, and yet, I don’t think I saw one positive comment come out of the Nikon clan. The thread became heated (and I sat back watching and not getting involved) because these members had to convince themselves it was not a Nikon killer and their little Nikon land was safe from potential destruction. It’s hard with all that bad press lately that you have to take to knocking other innovation until your blessed D850 comes out. The battery life was crap because of X. The sensor must have worse dynamic range because of X, the AF couldn’t work as well as DSLR, there is a clause that states Y. Apparently when the Nikon fanboys can pull apart Sony (for every reason except the Sony sensors because if they did that they would be knocking their own sensors but they will state the Sony sensor in Nikon is awesome but the Sony sensor in the A9 isn’t as good) but anyone who dares to say anything about Nikon is pulled apart as brand hatred. Have there been similar posts about the DR capability of the D850 not being as good? Or the high ISO not being as good? Nope, you could hear crickets if that topic came up.

Their boundaries don’t extend to only Sony. It’s mirrorless, because Nikon don’t have a decent mirrorless. Apparently Nikon don’t need a mirrorless because they don’t need one, but suddenly when Nikon produce one, it will be awesome and amazing and suddenly it will be good enough for them, because Nikon has the 400 f/2.8 (which most of the people here can’t afford anyway). And apparently Nikon don’t need good APSC glass because no one who is any good uses it, which looking at some of their lens selections, would make absolutely zero difference anyway.

So, no, my disdain for Nikon is not there. I’ve moved on, but what I haven’t moved on from is the issues from these members to anything non-Nikon or that doesn’t align to their perfect little world of DSLR that exists. And despite asking them to show me what they have personally produced that could not be achieved with APSC or mirrorless, I still hear crickets, because the only thing they can come up with is the 400 f/2.8.

[Lance B]

Oh for God's sake, you can't be serious. Funnily enough, I KNEW who would be the first to stick the boot into Nikon and it was going to be you. You do it at any opportunity. So, what should we do? Just sit back whilst you make false accusations, just like all the other social media reactionaries, when the facts presented show just an unfortunate set of circumstances. You are looking to blame someone when there is really no blame to be made. It was just an unfortunate set of circumstances that you and the social media, holier than though, virtue signalling set, want to make something out of when there is nothing there. You see, your small mindedness just won't accept that I would have defended ANY company for the very same set of circumstances. So, what isn't you don't get about the this? Nikon asked women to attend the function and they all decided they couldn't make it for one reason or another. Nikon had to go ahead with their function because of time restraints. Short of kidnapping women at the last moment there is nothing they could do. End of story, fake news. Get over it. Move on.

[MissionMan]

Oh for God's sake, you can't be serious. Funnily enough, I KNEW who would be the first to stick the boot into Nikon and it was going to be you. You do it at any opportunity. So, what should we do? Just sit back whilst you make false accusations, just like all the other social media reactionaries, when the facts presented show just an unfortunate set of circumstances. You are looking to blame someone when there is really no blame to be made. It was just an unfortunate set of circumstances that you and the social media, holier than though, virtue signalling set, want to make something out of when there is nothing there. You see, your small mindedness just won't accept that I would have defended ANY company for the very same set of circumstances. So, what isn't you don't get about the this? Nikon asked women to attend the function and they all decided they couldn't make it for one reason or another. Nikon had to go ahead with their function because of time restraints. Short of kidnapping women at the last moment there is nothing they could do. End of story, fake news. Get over it. Move on.

This was arthur’s first post in the A9 thread

People should really temper their enthusiasm for product hype over product reality before making great claims!(not referring to anyone here, but more generally in the net as a whole .. read some of the hyperbole and it hysterical).
Firstly! many claim that battery life is DSLR like. No way, nothing like it, never will be until they make the battery much bigger(and hence heavier) and body larger to suit.
Seen many claims that battery will last 600 exposures. Yeah right, that's one spec, and for a pro, 600 is only just pushing it .. so take many batteries just to be sure. Luckily they also introduced a multiple battery charger that suits this camera .. I reckon as a pro that accessory is a must have.
Read the actual specs and for a pro the expected battery life is barely consumer oriented compact comparable!! .. nothing like a DSLR. Battery life for a pro is one of the paramount specs they need to be mindful of.
With a DSLR, in general you don't need to worry about battery, you generally get between 800-1000 from most DSLRs at this level.
Hidden in the specs that I've yet not seen is that the A9 claims 600 exposures, but this is only if using the LCD screen, ie. not using the EVF!!
Apart from the odd hard to get image where the LCD is useful, what pro worth their reputation shoots with the LCD full time?
They all use the EVF, as the EVF is the drawcard for this type of camera, and Sony's spec says about 480 exposures when using the EVF!!!

480 exposures is not even comparable to a heavily used second hand Nikon D3300!!

In terms of professional tool, Sony really needed to work on that single factor.
On a shoot(any type, wedding, portrait, studio .. whatever) if you're always concerned about battery life and always keeping an eye on the battery indicator, you're not keeping you mind focused(pun intended) on the event at hand.
Having to change out 3 batteries in the time even a lowly consumer level DSLR won't need any change .. not really comparable to the 3000-ish exposures you'd get out of a single digit CaNikon.




Nah! I'm pretty sure they're all shrinking. DSLR shrinking faster than mirrorless, so the percentage factor for each company/body type changes continuously. You're reading that Sony's market share has increased .. not the same thing as their sales figures are higher than before. Just that by comparison to other manufacturers, they're not as dramatically low.

If you read Thoms blog he gives some decent reasoning as to what may have happened with the Sony/#2 posi.(marketing/promotional deals .. and currency of their latest products). Nikon's are all mainly older compared to Sony's.
If you carefully read the specific fine print, the marketing blurb about this specified that the position change was in terms of dollars .. ie. specifically not in units!
If it were measured in unit volume, they'd not have needed this fine print detail. Apparently what Sony does a lot is that they sell the A7's in kit form(as most folks buying won't/don't have a native lens) and then the kit sale is at an elevated price.
At that elevated price point, the Sony is registered as a full frame camera, but the $ value is still registered as the kit(because they don't separate the prices of the individual body and lens in the kit) ... this leads to 'greater value' products(where Nikon sell mainly D610s, D750s and D810s rather than in kit form). And Nikon's (US) promotional push was in Nov/Dec(for Christmas), whereas Sony's promotion deal season was in Jan/Feb.

As for the pros switching, Fuji has gained a fair amount of market share already in wedding photography where long lens like the 400 f/2.8 aren't required. How many pros need long lens? Wedding ohotographers? No. Portrait? No Studio? No. Landscape? no. It's only Wildlife and sports that require it.

This is true, but then again many of those types of photography could easily be done with any non 20fps camera body, and more specifically a higher res(say 42Mp) camera such as the A7Rii!
The photographer type that those specs are marketed towards seems to be more so those sports/wildlife types .. where they have no real competition in lens lineup, and would take many years of hard graft to catch up as well.
And then, as they don't have the history of those same lens types as per CaNikon do .. most of the lenses they do create at that end of the spectrum will all be super massively expensive by way of comparison too!
They should easily be able to get a 300/2.8 and 500/4 to market as they did buy into the brand that once was Minolta, and they have some background with respect to those lens types.
But they'd also need a 200/2, 200-400/4 and a trio of super capable teleconverters to suit all those lenses.

BUTT(a deliberate double butt here!) what would really be the point of that kind of exercise, other than to simply try and unseat the two established players in a small(but elite market segment) in some way?
When the lenses get that big, the advantage of that small body is diminished massively and the of the small compact lightweight body is redundant. In fact the ergonomics of cameras mounted onto on long lenses, are more favourable towards the larger camera bodies anyhow.
In terms of strength and durability, I can't imagine that the a9 will have the weatherproofing capability that a single digit CaNikon body will.

In reality this camera would appeal to D810/5DMkIV upgrade path types ... rather than the D1/1DX types.
And in this situation, the 20fps would basically be a redundant specification. The price is massively beyond both the CaNikon products (and astronomically beyond the Pentax K1) by comparison.

I think a few buyers will get into it early on, but only for the cache factor(ie. braggin rights, gear heads with more $'s than ȼ's .. etc).
As a long term product without the backup of the required accessories(ie. full lens list, GPS, etc) I can't see it as a commercial success(yet).[/QUOTE]

- - - Updated - - -

Oh for God's sake, you can't be serious. Funnily enough, I KNEW who would be the first to stick the boot into Nikon and it was going to be you. You do it at any opportunity. So, what should we do? Just sit back whilst you make false accusations, just like all the other social media reactionaries, when the facts presented show just an unfortunate set of circumstances. You are looking to blame someone when there is really no blame to be made. It was just an unfortunate set of circumstances that you and the social media, holier than though, virtue signalling set, want to make something out of when there is nothing there. You see, your small mindedness just won't accept that I would have defended ANY company for the very same set of circumstances. So, what isn't you don't get about the this? Nikon asked women to attend the function and they all decided they couldn't make it for one reason or another. Nikon had to go ahead with their function because of time restraints. Short of kidnapping women at the last moment there is nothing they could do. End of story, fake news. Get over it. Move on.

This was arthur’s first post in the A9 thread

People should really temper their enthusiasm for product hype over product reality before making great claims!(not referring to anyone here, but more generally in the net as a whole .. read some of the hyperbole and it hysterical).
Firstly! many claim that battery life is DSLR like. No way, nothing like it, never will be until they make the battery much bigger(and hence heavier) and body larger to suit.
Seen many claims that battery will last 600 exposures. Yeah right, that's one spec, and for a pro, 600 is only just pushing it .. so take many batteries just to be sure. Luckily they also introduced a multiple battery charger that suits this camera .. I reckon as a pro that accessory is a must have.
Read the actual specs and for a pro the expected battery life is barely consumer oriented compact comparable!! .. nothing like a DSLR. Battery life for a pro is one of the paramount specs they need to be mindful of.
With a DSLR, in general you don't need to worry about battery, you generally get between 800-1000 from most DSLRs at this level.
Hidden in the specs that I've yet not seen is that the A9 claims 600 exposures, but this is only if using the LCD screen, ie. not using the EVF!!
Apart from the odd hard to get image where the LCD is useful, what pro worth their reputation shoots with the LCD full time?
They all use the EVF, as the EVF is the drawcard for this type of camera, and Sony's spec says about 480 exposures when using the EVF!!!

480 exposures is not even comparable to a heavily used second hand Nikon D3300!!

In terms of professional tool, Sony really needed to work on that single factor.
On a shoot(any type, wedding, portrait, studio .. whatever) if you're always concerned about battery life and always keeping an eye on the battery indicator, you're not keeping you mind focused(pun intended) on the event at hand.
Having to change out 3 batteries in the time even a lowly consumer level DSLR won't need any change .. not really comparable to the 3000-ish exposures you'd get out of a single digit CaNikon.




Nah! I'm pretty sure they're all shrinking. DSLR shrinking faster than mirrorless, so the percentage factor for each company/body type changes continuously. You're reading that Sony's market share has increased .. not the same thing as their sales figures are higher than before. Just that by comparison to other manufacturers, they're not as dramatically low.

If you read Thoms blog he gives some decent reasoning as to what may have happened with the Sony/#2 posi.(marketing/promotional deals .. and currency of their latest products). Nikon's are all mainly older compared to Sony's.
If you carefully read the specific fine print, the marketing blurb about this specified that the position change was in terms of dollars .. ie. specifically not in units!
If it were measured in unit volume, they'd not have needed this fine print detail. Apparently what Sony does a lot is that they sell the A7's in kit form(as most folks buying won't/don't have a native lens) and then the kit sale is at an elevated price.
At that elevated price point, the Sony is registered as a full frame camera, but the $ value is still registered as the kit(because they don't separate the prices of the individual body and lens in the kit) ... this leads to 'greater value' products(where Nikon sell mainly D610s, D750s and D810s rather than in kit form). And Nikon's (US) promotional push was in Nov/Dec(for Christmas), whereas Sony's promotion deal season was in Jan/Feb.

As for the pros switching, Fuji has gained a fair amount of market share already in wedding photography where long lens like the 400 f/2.8 aren't required. How many pros need long lens? Wedding ohotographers? No. Portrait? No Studio? No. Landscape? no. It's only Wildlife and sports that require it.

This is true, but then again many of those types of photography could easily be done with any non 20fps camera body, and more specifically a higher res(say 42Mp) camera such as the A7Rii!
The photographer type that those specs are marketed towards seems to be more so those sports/wildlife types .. where they have no real competition in lens lineup, and would take many years of hard graft to catch up as well.
And then, as they don't have the history of those same lens types as per CaNikon do .. most of the lenses they do create at that end of the spectrum will all be super massively expensive by way of comparison too!
They should easily be able to get a 300/2.8 and 500/4 to market as they did buy into the brand that once was Minolta, and they have some background with respect to those lens types.
But they'd also need a 200/2, 200-400/4 and a trio of super capable teleconverters to suit all those lenses.

BUTT(a deliberate double butt here!) what would really be the point of that kind of exercise, other than to simply try and unseat the two established players in a small(but elite market segment) in some way?
When the lenses get that big, the advantage of that small body is diminished massively and the of the small compact lightweight body is redundant. In fact the ergonomics of cameras mounted onto on long lenses, are more favourable towards the larger camera bodies anyhow.
In terms of strength and durability, I can't imagine that the a9 will have the weatherproofing capability that a single digit CaNikon body will.

In reality this camera would appeal to D810/5DMkIV upgrade path types ... rather than the D1/1DX types.
And in this situation, the 20fps would basically be a redundant specification. The price is massively beyond both the CaNikon products (and astronomically beyond the Pentax K1) by comparison.

I think a few buyers will get into it early on, but only for the cache factor(ie. braggin rights, gear heads with more $'s than ȼ's .. etc).
As a long term product without the backup of the required accessories(ie. full lens list, GPS, etc) I can't see it as a commercial success(yet).[/QUOTE]

[Tannin]

Hmmm ... the all-male panel was a howler indeed, but perhaps they were selected from the press corps that photographed the Abbott Cabinet.

I take the point that Nikon have no control over who responds to an invitation and who does not, but any company large enough to have a media-savvy PR department (i.e., even companies vastly smaller than Nikon) should be smart enough to avoid obvious own-goals like this one. It just looks bad. Rule One in public relations is don't do anything that looks bad.

The second one though is as silly as an umbrella on a fish. It boils down to two claims: (1) that professional photographers use Fuji cameras (to a 99% approximation, nonsense), and (b) that the strong and steady trend towards full frame cameras for serious use doesn't exist (complete nonsense). It's silly fanboyism at its most obvious.

Nevertheless I welcome this thread: debate and dissension have a place in discussion, and it's a poor forum which never has disagreement.

Disclaimer via edit: I have no axe to grind re Nikon or Fuji. I own and use Canon cameras these days: in the dim and distant past I have owned and used a couple of Nikons, a couple of Fujis, a Minolta back in film days, and I started with a Kodak Box Brownie which probably came off a boat accompanied by animals loaded two by two.

[Lance B]

because the only thing they can come up with is the 400 f/2.8.

So, now we know the real reason for your issues. Interestingly, I WOULDN'T have made a thread up if the roles were reversed, if it were Fuji and not Nikon that did this. I wouldn't have made up a thread at all as it was FAKE NEWS. However, we can see what your agenda is, just by this little snide remark above.

[swifty]

My point with the interview is simple. It’s dangerous ground to be treading because:

a) It insults those who might have switched due to Nikon’s failed strategy so rather than admitting blame for the failure that is bleeding their customer base.
b) It is insulting to those professionals who are not using full frame (and there are many).

Now, some could argue that maybe there is some truth, but the questions you have to ask yourself when you make a statement like this is:

1. What do you have to gain from it?
2. Is it likely to improve your customer base?
3. Is it likely to make people return to your customer base that have left?
4. Are you potentially alienating ex-customers with statements like this?

To me personally, all of those above statements should reflect something which is likely to increase your customer base. His statements do nothing but have a negative impact. By making a broad statement like this, there is zero likelihood you will retrieve ex-customers. It simply comes across as arrogance and/or a lack of understanding of your customer base. To me, that is a marketing failure in line with Steve Ballmer’s idiotic statements about the iPhone and iPad. It was a failure to understand the way the market is moving which ultimately cost them a substantial amount of market share. They lost the phone market war completely and they could a big dent in their tablet market until they ultimately rectified.

I do consider some of what Goto said a disservice to Nikon. Because some will automatically assume he is speaking for Nikon without considering the nature of the interview. A man who had held such an important role previously should know better and be more careful with what he says for exactly that reason. Certain sectors of the media will pick up on just those bits and sensationalize things without considering the context. It's all about clicks and traffic for these sites and we all know that.
Unfortunately that's exactly what you have done. You've picked up on bits out of context that fits your narrative and have become very offended. Stop thinking people are having a personal dig at you. They simply have different opinions to you.

[arthurking83]

Sorry Rick, the point of this thread was to highlight the double standards of these members who go involved in this thread. I knew exactly who would get involved, because they always do, let’s call them the Nikon clan, a little boys club of Nikon who band together to defend everything Nikon and attach everything not-Nikon. So, I thought I’d throw out something that involved sexism in the industry, and problem that most of us are well aware, something we know exists. I knew they would defend Nikon because they always do, and yet we know the reality is Nikon (like most of the other companies) would not have invited many, if any females. We know the region is sexist across all industries. The truth of course is I could have posted something about Nikon’s use of slave labour and they would have found a reason to defend it based on slave labour being an acceptable industry practice.

Sexism is a problem in the industry? Can you point to any other news(fake or otherwise) that highlights this point? Or are we to simply accept that your point of view is the fact and that's that ... no additional correspondence to be entered?
I think if a comment/thread/reply is full of hype/BS/inaccuracies .. it simply an accepted behaviour to cal it out.
Sexism is not an issue in this industry... other than from Fuji who think that less than 10% of pros in the industry should be women promoting their wares!

And yet, it was the Nikon fans involved in this post who are the same people who pulled apart Sony during the A9 thread, finding any and every reason to pull a camera for every conceivable reason despite never having touched it, seen it or used it ...

so you're saying that we were wrong?
Are we not allowed to be sceptical of the 'new kid coming out with guns blazing'?
Have you actually taken the time to read up on what the experts have written about the A9? That the 20fps can't be used in full 14bit capture mode, or that it needs electronic shutter, which is known to limit exposure latitude?
Have Sony brought to market those big pro lenses that are very important to the uses that heavily rely on those fast frame rate camera bodies? Do you have any numbers to show that Olympus has taken over the sports tog pro market seeing as they have had an 18fps capable camera for a number of years now?

... Their boundaries don’t extend to only Sony. It’s mirrorless, because Nikon don’t have a decent mirrorless. Apparently Nikon don’t need a mirrorless because they don’t need one, but suddenly when Nikon produce one, it will be awesome and amazing and suddenly it will be good enough for them, because Nikon has the 400 f/2.8 (which most of the people here can’t afford anyway). And apparently Nikon don’t need good APSC glass because no one who is any good uses it, which looking at some of their lens selections, would make absolutely zero difference anyway.
So, no, my disdain for Nikon is not there. I’ve moved on, but what I haven’t moved on from is the issues from these members to anything non-Nikon or that doesn’t align to their perfect little world of DSLR that exists. And despite asking them to show me what they have personally produced that could not be achieved with APSC or mirrorless, I still hear crickets, because the only thing they can come up with is the 400 f/2.8.

So what you're saying here is that we're not allowed to have an opinion, and that only you are!
I'll remember that from now on and only agree to your comments ... if that's makes you happier here!
So now that you have entered the world of mirrorless systems and APS-C at that, this is the only way forward for the industry and that all players in the industry should change and that's that. Anyone elses opinion is invalid and unacceptable.

And speaking of crickets.. I've asked the question before and only heard crickets in response ..

How do you get the same rendered effect from a 200/2 or 200/1.8 on FF on APS-C in a single shot?, how to do you get a 6mm f/2.8 AOV image shot on FF from an APS-C camera in a single exposure?
All I hear is crickets again!
The point is not about whether any person here can or cant' afford those large 400/2.8's .. quite clearly some can .. or 600/4's so your point on this front = what?
Is it a requirement that we all have to be able to afford all manner of gear for it to come under discussion?
Was there a new law written that the products under discussion have to be affordable to a specific percentage of the membership of the group discussing the products?
No matter how I try to resolve this point, I can't see any relevance, why it'd come up as a topic for discussion in any way?

You bring up the topic of how Sony is going to worry Canikon as Sony took over the #2 slot, even if only for a brief 2 months.
Once again .. AND I SUGGEST YOU RE READ LANCES POSTS ON THE TOPIC .. this is faux news.
You introduced a a topic without fully or correctly wording it. Sony hit the #2 slot in the US market for a brief 1 month period in the FULL FRAME arena!!
When you read it that way(which is the more accurate way to describe that specific piece of info) .. it's totally different to "Sony knocked Nikon for #2 slot and they should be worried"

Also: show me the exact quotation where we've 'had a go at Sony'?
Highlighting the limitations imposed on the operator when the major drawcard feature has been found out to encumber the device with is NOT HAVING A GO!! at them .. it's simply tempering the hyperbole with a reality. That reality doesn't exist in the devices that the maker has stated it intends to compete with.

.....just won't accept that I would have defended ANY company for the very same set of circumstances. So, what isn't you don't get about the this? ....

My sentiments exactly. This has nothing to do with us(Nikon clan) or Nikon. The issue is that you feel threatened in some way because someone has an opinion that differs from yours, it just so happens that you had Nikon, they didn't give you whatever it was you wanted, so you moved to a boutique manufacturer that catered to your needs.
Had you had Canon previously, I dare say you'd be doing the same to the Canon clan.

I suggest you read the above again and read it again to be sure.

The problem here is that you feel hard done by from Nikon.
Any anti-Nikon news is news worthy and you will go out of your way to highlight the info, no matter that it's inaccurate fake, meaningless or simply rubbish info ... the fact that it's anti-Nikon is all that's important to you.
As upholders of the mirrored Nikon faith, it is our duty to call out BS for what it is.


From now on, if you make claims about me that you can't substantiate I will ask Rick to mod those writings.
I don't care that you call me names, or diss me in any way you feel is important to you or try to belittle me in any way .. trivial internet silliness that's water off a ducks back on my end ...

But if you make claims that I said something that I clearly haven't said AGAIN .. those actions will be taken from here on.


As a side note .. completely unrelated to any of this .. if you're so strongly anti-sexism, why haven't you posted on the current plight of male primary school teachers in this country.
While there are still some teaching, there was a recent study on the issue that the numbers are massively down dropping hugely year on year, and that the estimate is that they WILL be an extinct species within 50 years.
FWIW: both my kids favourite teachers at primary school were males! They each had 4 fave teachers: son all 4 males, daughter 3 males 1 female.

I see this topic as newsworthy sexism issues .. not some clickbait article propagated by under resourced 'news' agencies!