- Apple said no to Meta's idea of working together on artificial intelligence (AI), which is like making computers that can think and learn by themselves.
- Some people are saying that Apple might be harming its workers with chemicals, but Apple denies it.
- There are rumors about a new Apple Watch that has a bigger screen and is thinner than the older ones. Read from source...

1. In the first paragraph, it is stated that Apple rejected Meta's AI integration proposal. However, there is no clear explanation of why this rejection happened or what was the nature of the proposal. The reader is left to speculate about the reasons and the implications of this decision. This lack of detail creates a vague impression and does not provide any valuable insight into the situation.
2. In the second paragraph, it is mentioned that an ex-employee accuses Apple of chemical exposure. However, there is no context given about who the ex-employee is, when and where did this accusation take place, or what evidence supports this claim. The reader cannot verify the credibility or relevance of this information without more background details. This also introduces a negative tone to the article that may influence the perception of Apple in a unfavorable way.
3. In the third paragraph, it is reported that Apple's plan to reduce its assembly workforce faces setbacks due to precision issues. However, there is no explanation of what these precision issues are, how they affect the automation process, or why this matters for Apple's strategy. The reader may wonder why Apple is pursuing such a plan in the first place and whether it is a wise move or not. This paragraph also lacks any connection to the previous topics and seems to introduce a new issue that does not fit well with the rest of the article.
4. Overall, the article seems to lack coherence, clarity, and balance. It jumps from one topic to another without providing enough context, evidence, or analysis. It also presents some information that may be questionable, controversial, or irrelevant without acknowledging the possible alternative perspectives or implications. The article does not offer a comprehensive, objective, or informative overview of the week's events in Appleverse. Instead, it creates a impression of sensationalism, inconsistency, and bias that may undermine its credibility and usefulness for the readers.