Or maybe burning in is just a myth.
I have followed the burn-in "debate" from the very beginning, in a car-crash rubbernecking kind of way, and these are my impressions:
It wasn't generated by manufacturers or the press. It was invented solely by a certain type of customer, and manufacturers and the press were somewhat late to the party.
It's a deep psychological need among that certain type of customer. Ownership isn't enough, because anyone can plunk down a credit card. Hence a performative ritual was necessary, to stake a meaningful claim, and to demonstrate superior knowledge and discrimination. The ritual involved time, effort, precision and concern. It "earned" status through work.
A parallel can be seen in investment ads. The brokers don't say, "Hey, gamble a few bucks and see if you get lucky." Instead they say, "As you
work to
build your portfolio ... " They use strong, muscular, active and performative words.
The most famous exemplar is the food industry research reported in the 1950s by Vance Packard. An all-in-one cake mix was introduced. Just add water. But it sold badly. Research showed housewives felt guilty ... they wanted to feel this was
their cake. So the dried egg was removed. Now it was just add water and beat in an egg. Adding the egg was a performative act that "claimed" the cake for the maker. The new mix sold much, much better.
Now we see the same thing 70 years later. Connecting wires isn't enough. Sleeves must be rolled up, attention must be paid, hard work must be done. Only then has the customer "earned" his new piece.