We did not "back down" on music pricing

One thing I’ve always hated about the media is the way they put a negative slant on everything. For example, we reduce the price of unprotected music in order to reach a wider audience, and, frankly, simply to do something nice and great for our customers, and how does the New York Times play it? They say Apple backed down and caved in because Amazon was charging less for unprotected songs than we were. As if everything we do is some kind of reaction to Amazon. Totally wrong. Our decision had nothing to do with Amazon or anyone else. We’re just trying to do what’s best for customers. It’s all we ever try to do. But I guess that’s not sexy enough for the Times. Why let the facts get in the way of a good story, right?