What do you mean when you say host their content on Apple’s service? What is Apple doing exactly?
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
Ayn Rand herself would fully support Apple's decision. Many of the posters up in arms over this action seem to want/wish the government to intervene here --or are strongly implying that --but in every other regard believe in laissez faire capitalism. Which is it? Either private companies have the right to make their own business decisions or you are not a true libertarian/objectivist/conservative.
I've watched Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson quite a bit as response videos to other content I've seen. I can confidently say that they are the definition of fake news. They cite their own sources, make up details, and when they do cite something somewhat credible they like to omit pertinent facts in order to frame a subject in an even more extreme or outrageous manner. They are so crazy it's actually funny at times--except the sad part is people actually take them *seriously*. They present themselves as news.
I've watched Alex Jones and Paul Joseph Watson quite a bit as response videos to other content I've seen. I can confidently say that they are the definition of fake news. They cite their own sources, make up details, and when they do cite something somewhat credible they like to omit pertinent facts in order to frame a subject in an even more extreme or outrageous manner. They are so crazy it's actually funny at times--except the sad part is people actually take them *seriously*. They present themselves as news.
No it isn't. The left loves shutting up any dissent and now categorically accuses those who don't share their warped sense of reality of being racist, xenophobic, Islamophobic, homophobic, treasonous, etc etc etc. See Twitter censoring yet again another Conservative, Candace Owens and as usual blames it on an "error". Funny those errors only happen when Conservatives are "accidentally" blocked or removed. And lets have a look at the NYT for the latest installments of liberal tolerance of bigotry when it supports their views with the defense of Sarah Jeong. Imagine the liberal fake rage and backlash if you swapped out Jeong's rants against white males with black males, arabic males, jewish males. Oh good God, that would be WWIII for the left.
Wrong, freedom of speech refers to gov infringement on one's speech. Apple is a private company and can control what goes on their site. Controlling that data does not fall under freedom of speech if they deny access to their services.
Apple hosts the feeds that link people to the podcasts, they also provide search and other stuff like analytics. (They don't host the actual media, just the XML/RSS, etc and metadata the podcasters add to their account on iTunes.
Here's their link on how to submit a podcast that'll explain: https://itunespartner.apple.com/en/podcasts/overview (submitting: https://help.apple.com/itc/podcasts_connect/#/itc4f0f5ac7d)
All Apple did in this case, just removed the feed related to that podcaster. The said podcaster can just link people to their media assets on their site, their "customers" just won't be able to find it in iTunes on their own, they can add a URL to iTunes if they want.
But a private baker must bake the cake or its discrimination. I think private companies can do as they wish but it’s Liberals who seem to only agree with this when it’s big companies suppressing content they don’t like.
Nobody at Apple is stopping him from speaking. You’re more than welcome to go directly to the source.
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..."
Below is a podcast I listen to. Are you saying Apple hosts this feed? My podcast app is Downcast. Is their search functionality coming from Apple?
http://feeds.adknit.com/app-search/hln/se-cupp-unfiltered/all/720/200/
Two weeks ago Peter Fonda called for the President’s 12-year-old son to be placed in a cage and be raped by homosexual pedophiles.
Apple, why do you still list Peter Fonda movies in your iTunes Store?
Apple, why do you still list Peter Fonda movies in your iTunes Store?
So every single person can do that, no problem, but now Apple decide for me too. I didn’t ask. I can do that myself.
To me this is murky just like Facebook. If I share an article on Facebook from, say, Breitbart or Alternet is Facebook hosting that content and are they responsible for policing it?
Right of refusal is not discriminatory if it's applied equally to any customer that walks through the door. Thus, a baker in Colorado saying "I bake wedding cakes for heterosexuals but not homosexuals" is discriminatory under that state's laws.
With all the crap Trump has said, why does Apple still sell his audio books? Goes both ways.
He never said he wouldn’t bake cakes for homosexuals. He said he wouldn’t bake a cake for a gay wedding. A wedding is an event, not a sexual orientation. If a white person came in and said I’m hosting a white supremicist rally and need a cake for the event would a baker have to bake them a cake. Would not baking the cake be discriminatory?
It's their store, you're free to shop elsewhere. Your argument is silly, because you can't buy porn off itunes, does that equate that they are deciding for you too?
Exactly. This is the part they miss.
[doublepost=1533564030][/doublepost]
Don't confuse them with common sense...
A white supremicist rally isn't equal to a gay wedding. This is a pretty stupid analogy.
Discrimination against bigotry is perfectly fine. Discrimination against a human being for being born is not fine.
Company policies are run from the top. I dont even know who this guy is....
...but i do know that cutting someones speech you dislike is same as removing a voice from minority groups “era” we have fought to move on from.
And as apple becomes an even more important information carrier and conduit in our society, they should stand neutral.
...but i do know that cutting someones speech you dislike is same as removing a voice from minority groups “era” we have fought to move on from.
And as apple becomes an even more important information carrier and conduit in our society, they should stand neutral.
So you are basically saying it’s ok to do something as long as it is “justified “. Killing is wrong, but killing hitler is ok.