The New York Times ran an article titled "Is Trump's 'Made in America' iPhone a Fantasy?" which received criticism for indulging said fantasy with vaguely-reported numbers ($2000 iPhone? Which iPhone?) and sourcing to dial-a-quote analysts. But the bottom falls out with this paragraph:
Young Chinese women have small fingers, and that has made them a valuable contributor to iPhone production because they are more nimble at installing screws and other miniature parts in the small device, supply chain experts said.
If this is stupid on its face, the weaseled attribution to "supply chain experts" makes it worse. They're giving a source anonymity to say that Chinese women have the small, nimble fingers that electronics manufacturing calls for. Is the source the year 1972? The bizarre claim is quickly refuted by a perusal of the science.
one study found that the average Chinese person has a hand size approximately equal to that of the average German. An analysis of hand size around the world, though it didn't include China, found that even the largest average differences in women's hand size between countries was negligible.
And even if it was true, there doesn't seem to be a lick of evidence — or, for that matter, even anyone online making the claim — that small hands are preferable for manufacturing small devices. The closest thing we could find was a paper that found that surgeons with smaller hands actually had a harder time manipulating dextrous operating tools, which would seem to contradict the NYT's claim that small hands are an advantage for small specialized movements.
But The Times insists it's on the money. Here's Charlie Stadtlander:
Our reporting does not make racial or genetic generalizations, but simply cites experts who have experience with the industrial process in U.S. and Chinese factories.
The story is about why you can't make iPhones cheaply in the West. It attributes to an anonymous source the advantageous dexterity of Chinese womens' fingers. Charlie Stadtlander vouches for the relevance of this unnamed expert's expertise. Expertise in what, Charlie? Racial dactylonomy?
Next up: "simply cites experts" saying child labor is the only way for America to compete. Small nimble everything.
Consider the Radium Girls, women hired to paint glow-in-the-dark watch dials with the radioactive paint that slowly killed them. Given how obviously their circumstances involved wartime labor exploitation, contemporaneous social norms and sexist assumptions, who would now believe that they hired those young, unmarried, ununionized women because only they are dextrous enough to paint watches? "Supply chain experts" it is.
When Foxxconn has the press in for a tour, it's all girls on the line; when the line riots, then we see the boys. The reality is mixed, a reality reflected in tragedy.
Update: John Gruber suggests the quote is simply made up. He's probably right. That slippery attribution is how tabloids fake quotes to launder their own opinions as those of sources—inconceivable for the Times, but you know the thing about that word.
Exactly so! Behold the sausage fingers of one of the 20th century's greatest watchmakers.
Update II: Adam Savage recalls "one of the weirdest movies ever made, Crazy People, starring Dudley Moore and Darryl Hannah. This commercial was part of the movies premise of ad execs saying the truth." Just watch it!
