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 Removes Five of Six Infowars Podcast Series From iTunes Directory
- Thread starter MacRumors
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Ummm...except in this case "The People" is a trillion-dollar corporation that just unilaterally decided what you should hear or think inside their walled garden. If you don't like what Alex Jones is saying then just don't listen. It seems to be the way all of us idiots are supposed to behave.
It really is like talking to a wall.
Who is Alex going to blame for this?
The US government using chemicals to make Gay frogs? Martian Vampires colluding with NASA?
Or will it be the cave dwelling demon goblins?
For the unfamiliar, these are all things he has peddled on his show.
The US government using chemicals to make Gay frogs? Martian Vampires colluding with NASA?
Or will it be the cave dwelling demon goblins?
For the unfamiliar, these are all things he has peddled on his show.
Apple doesn’t host the content. Do you think Google should remove Jones’s website and podcast links from Google search?
I really dislike Alex Jones. I went so far as to put entries in my hosts file that point all his domains to a dummy IP so I don't accidentally click on click-bait some time and give him one extra view. And I'm a person who is slightly right of center, that tells you how much I dislike his nut-job theories, lies, and distortion.
All that said, if I were in his position I'd be going Larry Flint right now (and he probably should). Sure, the first amendment doesn't apply to private institutions in MOST CASES, but it has been held with physical locations that the first amendment does apply to "public square" situations. e.g. shopping malls can be forced to accept the right to assemble and speak. We're reaching (likely reached already) the point where the internet is more important to free speech than physical locations and most people get broadcast format information from other individuals in just a few major locations (facebook, youtube, twitter, insta) so if those three companies (facebook/insta both being owned for facebook) decide to lock someone out for disagreeing with their message they can silence them just as effectively as (possibly more than if anonymity is also involved) a rogue government without the constraints of the first amendment.
Someone will bring this issue to SCOTUS. If I were Alex Jones I'd want the publicity of being the one to do it.
All that said, if I were in his position I'd be going Larry Flint right now (and he probably should). Sure, the first amendment doesn't apply to private institutions in MOST CASES, but it has been held with physical locations that the first amendment does apply to "public square" situations. e.g. shopping malls can be forced to accept the right to assemble and speak. We're reaching (likely reached already) the point where the internet is more important to free speech than physical locations and most people get broadcast format information from other individuals in just a few major locations (facebook, youtube, twitter, insta) so if those three companies (facebook/insta both being owned for facebook) decide to lock someone out for disagreeing with their message they can silence them just as effectively as (possibly more than if anonymity is also involved) a rogue government without the constraints of the first amendment.
Someone will bring this issue to SCOTUS. If I were Alex Jones I'd want the publicity of being the one to do it.
It’s pretty amazing watching all of the right-wing come to defend Alex Jones. His ideas are very, very radical and hateful and actually incite violence. For some reason I think if it were radical jihads posting the same kind of content, conservatives would feel differently.
I never said that. I said who is Apple to decide? I’d love for Apple to say specifically what speech violated their guidelines. Or are they just reacting to the mob? Btw this isn’t a defense of Jones. I’ve never listened to him and have no plans to. That’s how the market works. Individuals decided not to listen, support, give money to someone.
Just posting videos isn’t providing evidence. Evidence is putting into writing the words you claim are hate speech. Think of how you’d want a court case to go where you were accused of saying something illegal. You wouldn’t want the prosecution to be able to say, ‘just watch this video’. You’d want them to say for instance, ‘on or about August 5th 2018 defendant said “I think all (blanks) should be (blanked)”’.
It should be noted, if you still want to listen to his ******** you can subscribe manually. This is a non-issue.
You’ve hit the nail right on the head there. If this were someone from a Muslim and or Islamic background it would be a totally different story, hell in the U.K it would be headline news in the racist news paper that we call the Daily Mail (Or nickname the Daily Fail).
See my post above though. There are situations in which private spaces have been held to be equivalent to main street. I believe this has been split between districts so far so a good candidate for SCOTUS to take up (although purely physical so far and primarily shopping malls, no one has tested with big internet platforms yet that I'm aware of). The cartoon certainly applies to small sites but may not apply to facebook/google/apple; I'd expect someone to file soon given the publicity around banning major personalities and organizations based upon content.
If he’s inciting violence why didn’t Apple say that? Or how about they point to the specific violent content? I’m not trying to be snarky, I’ve never listened to his show or followed news reports on his controversies.
So you are telling me the cartoon is completely on spot.
I had no idea who he was until today, soo... But indeed, based on those few descriptions I've read about him today, he is a complete racist nutcase that definitely shouldn't be allowed to spew evildoing to a wide audience.
Personally I do believe that anyone who listens to that kind of crap are idiots. If you listen and believe stuff like that, then one truly lacks a sense of reality.
Pot, meet kettle.
Good riddance. Also its kind of alarming how many in this sub are against this removal. Alex Jones appeals to the mentally ill and the mentally ill act out. Look how many parents are harassed because he falsely claimed Sandy Hook was a hoax? This isn't some differing opinion, this is pure hate speech targeted at a mentally ill audience that often acts on his commands.
Apple was smart to remove him.
Apple was smart to remove him.
So what’s the point then? Or are people going to start arguing Google is responsible for spreading hate speech because you can search for anything on google.com?
the political spectrum isn't a line, it's a circle, and when you get far enough left or right the conspiracy nuts all meet in the dark alley behind said circle
Last edited:
Probably because they took the diplomatic route and played down how serious he is. His followers harass and threaten people.
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.
Apple’s terms and conditions prohibit hate speech, which you’ll find most of the time entails making threats and inciting violence.
Why bother with a straw man argument like that? Apple doesn't want to host the content because it violates their terms. Besides, Alex Jones claimed in his own divorce case that he was just an actor reading from a script and that InfoWars itself was purely "entertainment", so all of the people in this thread that believe Apple is suppressing a "different point of view" are mistaken. Jones himself swore under oath that it's just an act.
I’m against false charges of hate speech and for fairness. There is no worse crime in our time than hate speech. To falsely accuse someone is disgusting.
I’m sure there are all sorts of crazy podcasts on iTunes. I’m sure there are all sorts of podcasts I’d consider disgusting and immoral. But is Apple providing an open forum or a censored forum? Can Apple even censor people? I think not.
I don’t listen to Jones. The one thing I do know is he exposed the freaks at the Bohemian Grove party. Everyone denied the freakiness of that event. Some even denied the event. As a promoter of conspiracies he actually has credibility. But again, I don’t listen to him. However, I think he shouldn’t be libeled, which I think Apple did.
At some point exercising editorial control means loss of the DMCA safe harbor.
I supportplus Apple in their doubleplusgood campaign to rid the world of thoughtcrime. The proles must be kept thoughtpure.
I supportplus Apple in their doubleplusgood campaign to rid the world of thoughtcrime. The proles must be kept thoughtpure.
I think a private company is within its rights to not want to advertise, feature, or otherwise make it easy to subscribe content they disagree with on their service. They have not banned his podcast, just an easier way to subscribe. The option is still there. And yes, Google is responsible, and I'm sure while you can still get to hate speech using the search engine, there are sites they have removed or have artificially weighted as not to be highly indexed to make them harder to access.
Who?
[doublepost=1533562867][/doublepost]
He most likely is, but that not the point.