That's fine, but the tone of this piece was surprise that Apple would use its own marketing event to make Apple look good. Calling them out on facts is good, but there's no need to tell me that Apple will selectively present features based on how good it sells.
I think the backlash is stronger because Apple puts more into their marketing. They put a lot of effort into making everything "magical", "unforgettable", and "world changing". Naturally, some people have strong adverse reactions to that, and are going to be quite negative in an attempt to even it out, at least as they see it. It makes complete sense if you look at it as a counter/reaction to Apple's heavily positive PR.
“In what seems like a ritual at this point, I watched Apple's iPad 2 keynote in disbelief, noting the factual errors that kept coming up minute after minute.”
The only surprise is that a journalist bothered to fact-check a Stevenote.
The only surprise is that a journalist bothered to fact-check.
Most just put ditto remarks on a press release or a presentation. In tech journalism, there's been a meme that Jobs has a "reality distortion field", so there's free attention when someone actually bothers to look at Apple claims.
Good journalist? Look at this guy's article history. He writes about nothing else but Google and Android. Of course he's going to be critical of one of Google's major competitors.
Generalizing,
You see, [companies] love to talk about [what] is in its best interest.