Alex Jones claimed in his own divorce proceedings that he's simply an actor reading from a script for entertainment purposes and that the court shouldn't interpret anything he said on InfoWars as being his own opinion or a representation of his own mindset. Thus, all the people claiming that InfoWars being banned from the App Store is tantamount to some sort of political repression are clearly mistaken. Jones himself has said otherwise. He considers himself to be an actor. He considers InfoWars to just be scripted entertainment. It has no real value in terms of news or politics at all.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Apple Permanently Bans 'Infowars' App From the App Store
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
It was his lawyer who claimed that, but yeah, wouldn't be surprised. I had a hard time finding a good, raw source of this, so this is the best I've got: https://www.mystatesman.com/news/st...h-for-real-alex-jones/rnbWzMHnFCd5SOPgP3A34J/
There is no such thing as “hate speech”. There is free speech or no free speech.
Hate speech has been described as “calling someone the wrong preferred gender” even on accident. It’s silly, subjective and dangerous as our free societies begin to close the Overton window.
Apple is free to do this, of course, but if we all can get some identifying definition rather than these ambiguous explanations that can be applied to anyone from Alex Jones to PragerU, Eric Weinstein or Sam harris.
Hate speech has been described as “calling someone the wrong preferred gender” even on accident. It’s silly, subjective and dangerous as our free societies begin to close the Overton window.
Apple is free to do this, of course, but if we all can get some identifying definition rather than these ambiguous explanations that can be applied to anyone from Alex Jones to PragerU, Eric Weinstein or Sam harris.
Why is this “hate speech” allowed?
I wouldn't give a crap if Twitter banned her, either.
Their choice (you still don't get this).
But it is clearly the same kind of “hate speech” yet it is allowed. Why?
BECAUSE THEY ARE A PRIVATE ENTITY AND CAN BAN WHOMEVER THEY WANT TO OR NOT (AND TWITTER HAS MADE A CHOICE NOT TO BAN HER AS OF RIGHT NOW).
How do you not understand this?
If it’s obvious that there are gaping holes of mass media censorship then how is mass media censorship hiding anything? If many outlets provide information not covered by the mass media, then why does it matter what they do or don’t cover?
How do you not understand that the rules aren’t evenly applied? Do you understand hypocrisy?
Either ban all, or ban no one.
Why is this allowed but Jones isn’t?
Anytime any major shocking world news event happens, read the mainstream media take, and then go watch what actually happened on Liveleak.
You’ll soon get it.
Something to consider regarding the kneeling: did the NFL actually have a workplace rule contained in the NFLPA contract that specified a particular body posture during the anthem back when it first started? If not, your argument has a fairly large hole in it. After all, the only reason the teams were on the field from 2009 forward was because the NFL wanted to make money from it by having tributes to the military that were subsidized by the government. The idea that it's some sort of purely idealistic exercise on the NFL's part is not really true. It was another way to turn a buck from the games.
So complain about them being mean to people you support. Stop talking about slippery slopes and free speech. One is a valid argument. The other makes you look like a clown.
This is like a "Choose Your Own Destiny" book and you keep on picking the bad decisions.
We can agree to disagree about the ignorance of some other posters.
Now, for the more fun question...
Anyone thinks Alex Jones shows up at the iPhone event next week with his bullhorn?
If you've ever watched him, you'd understand this is something he is certainly considering.
I'd bet a steak dinner he is in Cupertino next week.
It's a good question with no single right answer.
Maybe try a bit of soul-searching. Reflect on what exactly it is you're agreeing with and why.
Start with that and see where it takes you.
Let him. Freedom of speech allows it. Apple can remove him or bar him from entry, too.
Also, nothing really to "agree to disagree" about. It's a fact that numerous posters have been whining about free speech.
I think of it as Apple's speech. If they host an app, it means they approve of what's on it to some degree, and people will hold them accountable for it. So they choose what to express, as is their right. Same reason they ban legal porn.
If it weren't like this, I doubt Apple would care. For example, with Safari it's different. The user chooses to visit Jones's site, and Apple doesn't block it.
Last edited:
Avoiding the question. Again. And this isn’t about who I support. I don’t even agree with Jones, I am just pointing out the hypocrisy.
So, why is it that this allowed yet Jones isn’t?
I've answered you several times now, and you just confirmed you're looking for me to agree with you. You asked a question, I answered. If you don't like my answer, that's one thing, but to say I didn't answer is disingenuous.
I didn't avoid anything.
This is "allowed" because Twitter said so. It's their platform and they can regulate it how they choose. Why is Trump allowed to quote white supremacists on Twitter and not get banned? Because Twitter says so.
This is really not that difficult. Do you simply not understand how the private sector works?
Last edited by a moderator:
To all those who were laughing at me calling this a slippery slope - it’s already happening.
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...aders-youtube-videos/articleshow/65734435.cms
https://economictimes.indiatimes.co...aders-youtube-videos/articleshow/65734435.cms
But they aren’t. Why? Is it because they agree with her? Is what she saying not racist filth? Alex Jones is a joke. A clown. A caricature of immense proportions. He’s been banned.
Where is there a consistent policy regarding Twitter? That’s what your not getting. They are free to ban all the conservatives they want. If they want a bunch of milquetoast republicans and ban the rest, then say so.
Right, exactly. The guy is whining to high heavens because no one agrees with him. And then he cries that people are avoiding answering him. Rinse and repeat.
It’s cool if you don’t feel like responding to my questions.
So you are complicit with hypocritical actions so long as they suit your agenda.
Got it.