The Nothing Phone (1) was launched this week and has received mostly positive initial feedback.
However, the “DearNothing” controversies in India also tarnished the image a bit. What do you think about this matter?
Nothing Phone (1) took some time to launch the “DearNothing” caption on Twitter and YouTube.
The beginning of the problem with Nothing Phone (1)
According to The Indian Express, the banner originated in the tech community of South India.
Why that mainly comes down to the YouTube channel.
Incidentally, within hours of the launch of Nothing Phone (1), YouTube channel Prasadtechintelugu released a video about Nothing Phone (1).
Like other publications, a video has been released that is believed to be a prank about not receiving a review unit of the device.
As the video reveals, while units are available in other parts of the country, many developers in South India were left out of the initial preview units for the device.
In the video, an imitation of the packaging design of Nothing Phone (1) is created.
There is also a note inside saying, “Hello Prasad, this device is not for South Indians. Thank you.”
The fake note, which mimics the Nothing’s dot-matrix logo, was intended as a mockery .
But was considered by many to be the real note from the company founded by Carl Pei.
The misleading video went viral within hours, with thousands of people retweeting “DearNothing” on Twitter.
After that the creator of the video has issued an explanation via YouTube Shorts . The original video has also removed from the channel.
Manu Sharma, general manager of Noth’s VP and India, posted a statement on Twitter about the controversy.
The statement explains the company’s position on sending review units.
The announcement reads,
“For us, content is embedded across all media verticals . Such as print, online, blogs, broadcast, to name a few, and (not just) YouTube.”
For the Nothing Phone (1) we plan to ship devices in phases.
A number of content creators, including local language journalists, have received these units as part of the publication,” it said.
All things considered, this situation seems to be an unfortunate misunderstanding.