Apple Removes Five of Six Infowars Podcast Series From iTunes Directory

[Rogifan]

Honestly how do you people not understand, THIS IS NOT A FREEDOM OF SPEECH ISSUE. Freedom of speech refers to Gov infringement on one's speech, that's it. It doesnt expand to companies dictating content on their own sites.

So if some regional cable company said they would no longer carry MSNBC you’d defend that decision?

 

[widgeteer]

So if some regional cable company said they would no longer carry MSNBC you’d defend that decision?

MSNBC is not equal to Alex Jones.

 

[barkomatic]

I don't have a problem with any company doing what they want as a private company. What I have an issue with is you never see liberal propaganda, and let's be honest, the main stream media is absolutely propaganda, ever censored. Facebook and Twitter never remove liberal mouth pieces from their sites. It only happens to Conservatives under the guise of hate speech and the profiles removed are typically reinstated and Facebook and Twitter usually issue an apology with a "sorry, it was an error in our servers..."

I am also concerned about the ever expanding definition of hate speech and how notable influencers are trying to draw a line between hate speech and free speech--as if they are two different things.

However, I think it might be wise to find a more credible example to defend. It's harder to make the argument with Infowars, which deliberately spreads sensational misinformation. Finding an example of censorship that doesn't include misinformation or slurs would be better in my opinion.

 

[webbuzz]

The creator and owner of the said Apple Podcasts service. It is their absolute right to decide who can host their content on Apple's service, Apple could ban anyone they want to, without any reasons. Apple is just saying their guidelines on hate speech is what they're using, they actually do not need a reason nor need to justify any action they take. You don't have that right at all to listen to anything you want on Apple's owned services.

This has zero to do with government or freedom of speech. Nobody has the absolute right to any speech in any private places in USA, the laws only protect your rights to speech in a public settings and not by government only, nothing to do with private companies nor private locations. You cannot yell fire in a movie theater just because you want to, you will be thrown in jail for creating potential harm or lies.

Here is some light reading for you.

https://www.theatlantic.com/nationa...g-the-fire-in-a-crowded-theater-quote/264449/

https://www.popehat.com/2012/09/19/...hackneyed-apologia-for-censorship-are-enough/

http://civil-liberties.yoexpert.com...-shout-"fire"-in-a-crowded-theater-19421.html

 

[Rogifan]

We will have to agree to disagree. Jones is famous for hate speech. It even got brought up in court where he lost custody of his children. Apple doesn't want to support someone known for hate speech on their platform and I can't blame them.

The problem is hate speech is a vague term. Based on Liberals definition, some of Samantha Bee’s comments would qualify but how many on the Left shunned her and said her TV show should be off the air? Same thing with Michelle Wolf. Some in the media spoke out but most seemed uncomfortable or annoyed that her comments forced them to have to speak out.
[doublepost=1533570000][/doublepost]

MSNBC is not equal to Alex Jones.

Say who? Mind you I don’t think they are either but who gets to make that decision?

 

[GuruZac]

_______________ Oh please....this is not about the Roman Catholic Church....if the America Left is so oppressive....why is it that the entire Gov from the Trump House..US house, Senate & Supreme court are ALL TRUMP'S PEOPLE?
[doublepost=1533569426][/doublepost]
You are a "what about Trumpster..."

Haha again resorting to name calling at me. How pedantic.

I know you won’t listen to this or care, but there’s a reason people don’t get as upset about “racist” comments directed toward whites:

A) the concept of biological race didn’t even exist until the 16th century. It was invented in Europe to justify oppression of “non-white” people
B) racism is therefore generally understood as a systemic form of oppression based on race. You would need to be delusional in order to think that white people are oppressed in America.

You're right, I don't care, because I know A.) and B.) I never said anything about whites being oppressed. What would the left say is the New York Post hired someone who tweeted #cancelblackpeople. The liberals would be up in arms. But if a liberal rag like the NYT hires and defends people who made tweets saying #cancelwhitepeople there is no liberal rage. Surely you see where there is a problem?

 

[widgeteer]

The problem is hate speech is a vague term. Based on Liberals definition, some of Samantha Bee’s comments would qualify but how many on the Left shunned her and said her TV show should be off the air? Same thing with Michelle Wolf. Some in the media spoke out but most seemed uncomfortable or annoyed that her comments forced them to have to speak out.
[doublepost=1533570000][/doublepost]
Say who? Mind you I don’t think they are either but who gets to make that decision?

Nope. So much wrong here. And this is part of the problem with these discussions: people want to insist all things are the same things.

Alex Jones insisting Sandy Hook was a hoax is not the same as Michelle Wolf making fun of Sarah Sanders for constantly lying.

Samantha Bee calling Ivanka Trump a feckless c-word is not the same as Roseanne Barr calling a black woman an ape.

This is pretty easy stuff to understand and differentiate.

 

[neliason]

The problem is hate speech is a vague term. Based on Liberals definition, some of Samantha Bee’s comments would qualify but how many on the Left shunned her and said her TV show should be off the air? Same thing with Michelle Wolf. Some in the media spoke out but most seemed uncomfortable or annoyed that her comments forced them to have to speak out.

That isn’t the problem. It is the reason for its existence. The whole point of inventing the idea of hate speech is to shut down opposing viewpoints. The liberal New York Times hired a horrible racist who writes offensive things. It doesn’t care that she engages in racist hate speech that encourages violence.

 

[macduke]

Now if only Google would have the balls to shut down his YouTube channel. Oh wait, extremists peddlers of hate make YouTube way too much money—and are slowly killing their platform and advertiser revenue. It's only a matter of time, but at least Apple is doing something—even if they're pretty late. You can say whatever you want IRL or on your own hosted web server, but not on a private company's platform and property. The biggest problem with the internet is it gave everyone a voice. That sounds like a really anti-freedom thing to say, but hear me out. The local kook on the street corner handing out pamphlets now has a microphone the size of the grand canyon and fake news social media algorithms pick up his "stories" and carry them to the ends of the earth all because they whip people into a frenzy and generate more ad revenue with shocking headlines. The system is broken and IDK if it's possible to close this Pandora's Box.

 

[unobtainium]

You're right, I don't care, because I know A.) and B.) I never said anything about whites being oppressed. What would the left say is the New York Post hired someone who tweeted #cancelblackpeople? The liberals would be up in arms. But if a liberal rag like the NYT hires and defends people who made tweets saying #cancelwhitepeople. Surely you see where there is a problem?

I think her comments were a poor attempt to fight back against the racist trolls who were attacking her for being an Asian woman. It was a poorly thought out reaction, mostly because she should have realized it wouldn’t help anything. But she was reacting (badly) to very real racism and vitriol being directed at her. So whatever, I can forgive it.

 

[barbu]

The problem is hate speech is a vague term. Based on Liberals definition, some of Samantha Bee’s comments would qualify but how many on the Left shunned her and said her TV show should be off the air? Same thing with Michelle Wolf. Some in the media spoke out but most seemed uncomfortable or annoyed that her comments forced them to have to speak out.
[doublepost=1533570000][/doublepost]
Say who? Mind you I don’t think they are either but who gets to make that decision?

Exactly! It's like police! Who decided they are the real police!? I call 1-800-CLOWN-NOW when I need help! Nothing has any meaning! Professionalism is a made-up word. Credentials and education just keep an honest man down! UP with the idiots! Everything is whatever! Well argued, Rogi.

 

[GuruZac]

I think her comments were a poor attempt to fight back against the racist trolls who were attacking her for being an Asian woman. It was a poorly thought out reaction, mostly because she should have realized it wouldn’t help anything. But she was reacting (badly) to very real racism and vitriol being directed at her. So whatever, I can forgive it.

But would you also extend the same forgiveness for someone who may make the comment #cancelblackpeople? I know nearly all on the left would not be so gracious.

 

[Phil in ocala]

It's digital book burning. Sure, their platform and all, but that still doesn't change the fact they are absolutely digital book burners.

The intersection of Mao and Stalin rather than Arts and Humanities.

More like taking Mein Kempf off the shelves.

 

[widgeteer]

But would you also extend the same forgiveness for someone who may make the comment #cancelblackpeople? I know nearly all on the left would not be so gracious.

It all depends. Context is everything.

 

[BruiserBear]

The best thing about moments like this is the cockroaches of society coming out and identifying themselves when they defend this guy. He's a horrible human being who does nothing but try and make a living peddling a false reality to people who have no ability to rationally discern what is real and what is not.

 

[vipergts2207]

So if some regional cable company said they would no longer carry MSNBC you’d defend that decision?

Are you unaware that stuff that like happens all the time?

http://wnynewsnow.com/2017/10/15/spectrum-cable-set-to-drop-23-channels/
https://deadline.com/2017/11/cbs-dish-network-blackout-no-deal-deadline-passes-1202212967/

Usually it's a dispute over money, but customers' remedies here are exactly the same as they are in those cases, choose a new provider that offers the content you want, or deal with it.

 

[barbu]

Haha again resorting to name calling at me. How pedantic.

You're right, I don't care, because I know A.) and B.) I never said anything about whites being oppressed. What would the left say is the New York Post hired someone who tweeted #cancelblackpeople. The liberals would be up in arms. But if a liberal rag like the NYT hires and defends people who made tweets saying #cancelwhitepeople there is no liberal rage. Surely you see where there is a problem?

It's almost like there's an asymmetry in the power structures available to black folk and white folk.
This is why conservatives can never be funny. They don't understand humour and certainly don't understand that punching down is a miserable, ****** thing to do.

 

[T-R-S]

Dear Mr. Alex Jones,
Hate Speech is NOT free speech and go crawl back in your hole where you slithered out from.
Remember WWII and what happened to the "Master Race" that preached hate...

 

[widgeteer]

It's almost like there's an asymmetry in the power structures available to black folk and white folk.
This is why conservatives can never be funny. They don't understand humour and certainly don't understand that punching down is a miserable, ****** thing to do.

It's virtually every race discussion here, and other areas online. So many people pretend as though we operate in a completely level playing field, and all things are equal.

 

[Sora]

It's a common mistake people make equating the censuring capabilities of private companies, with that of the government and the amendments of the United States Constitution.

I blame this entirely on education.

Firstly. The Constitution prohibits the GOVERNMENT (namely Congress) from enacting any laws that inhibit free speech of the public. This has NO impact on private companies.

Private companies can enact policies all day long that inhibit and prohibit free speech.
Private companies can enact policies that punish, punitively any public speech that isn't in line with their policies, procedures and/or views of the company.
Private companies can put an NDA within your employment contract prohibiting you from speaking freely.

Education is amazing. It changes your life.

 

[obeygiant]

The best thing about moments like this is the cockroaches of society coming out and identifying themselves when they defend this guy. He's a horrible human being who does nothing but try and make a living peddling a false reality to people who have no ability to rationally discern what is real and what is not.

For a second I thought you were talking about Sarah Jeong.

 

[Jimmy Bubbles]

I'm sure Infowars is grateful for the free publicity. Don't know why Apple would want to support them, though.
[doublepost=1533553585][/doublepost]
It isn't even smart. If they really dislike this sort of speech, best thing they could do is just leave it alone, and let the market decide. Free publicity is free publicity, no matter how you slice it.

I agree. They are providing a platform to ALL kinds and types of views. By doing this, they are just perpetuating the end of freedom of speech and ALL ideas. It is ironic how completely opposite this is of Apple’s core ideas. I used to work for the company, so yes, I do know about Apple from both sides. Don’t @ me!

 

[barbu]

It's virtually every race discussion here, and other areas online. So many people pretend as though we operate in a completely level playing field, and all things are equal.

b/c they are literally incapable of understanding someone else's situation or perspective. It is the literal absence of empathy. It's a disease, I am just not sure if it is getting worse or if it's always been this bad.
The funniest of all is when it personally affects them, such as Trump-voting farmers who are being wiped out by tariffs. They themselves say it's worth it if they suffer! They cannot even empathize with THEMSELVES or their own family because they are too excited about sticking it to the libs (or more likely, avoiding the psychological snap-back from realizing how wrong they have been all this time).

 

[mixel]

Excellent! I really wish companies would do more to make sure complete crap wasn’t on their platforms. Even a moments fact checking makes it clear infowars is actively misleading. It’s 100% lying for your money. It’s no different to the end times evangelical crazies scamming people out of their money for food buckets. The consequences of being a hate stirring nonsense media source should be responsible vendors limiting the platform.

Good riddance.

And come off it anyone equating infowars and Alex Jones with real, protected media. FFS. This isn’t because he’s not on the left, it’s because he’s constantly libellous, lying, and making **** up.

Edit: And now, finally YouTube have removed him too. Interesting how it takes one company to enforce their (pretty clear!) rules and suddenly every platform “suddenly realises” infowars has been breaking theirs too.

 

[gnipgnop]

Do you have more information on this? Did a google search but couldn’t find anything that said he asked about their sexual orientation before they said what the cake was for.

It doesn't actually matter under Colorado law. He sold wedding cakes to heterosexuals, thus he can't refuse to sell them to homosexuals. Notice that he never claimed that the customers wanted some sort of design or message that was different from what was offered to anyone else. He just flatly refused to provide any type of wedding cake design to them because it was a gay marriage.