What's going on with the "Apple resumes marketing on X" topic?

[turbineseaplane]

I'm hoping someone can officially comment on why the "Apple resumes advertising on X" topic has shown up in feeds, briefly on the forum with comments disabled ... also as a topic this morning in Apple Co news area ... and now fully deleted

This one seems pretty noteworthy and, yes, controversial, but no more so than most of the topics hitting the Political News forum

Why is this not being posted and allowed to be discussed?

Thank you

 

[T'hain Esh Kelch]

Likely because the chance of that discussion not leading into a hell hole of negative comments is essentially zero. No one would benefit from it.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Likely because the chance of that discussion not leading into a hell hole of negative comments is essentially zero. No one would benefit from it.

So relevant news is not even going to be posted about if there is concern they'll be a negative reaction or it will be controversial?

That's every topic that makes its way into the Political News area already

 

[I7guy]

Probably because the thread was a dumpster fire. The amount of time to delete the thread won in comparison to cleaning the thread up.

The community got the opportunity to act like adults, stay on topic, avoid trolling etc., and they failed.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Probably because the thread was a dumpster fire.

Was it up and running?

I saw it in my RSS feed and from moment one it comments disabled

 

[I7guy]

Was it up and running?

I saw it in my RSS feed and from moment one it comments disabled

Didn’t know it was missing until you pointed it out.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Likely because the chance of that discussion not leading into a hell hole of negative comments is essentially zero. No one would benefit from it.

Probably because the thread was a dumpster fire. The amount of time to delete the thread won in comparison to cleaning the thread up.

The community got the opportunity to act like adults, stay on topic, avoid trolling etc., and they failed.

In that case, it occurs to me to ask, why bother starting the thread in the first place?

It would seem to me that there may be something of a dilemma (on the part of owners of the site) between a desire to promote user traffic - i.e. views, clicks, such as is inevitably the case with these topics, threads and titles - which is battling with a desire to avoid controversy on such threads, or a preference not to have to invest the time, effort and energy to engage in moderation of such sections and threads.

Given what is currently happening in that weird nexus where the world of tech - and those who own much of it - and the world of politics and power intersect (and - given current events - nowadays, nobody can argue convincingly or credibly that tech and politics are not linked - for, at the moment, they are conjoined closer than many Siamese twins), to deny discussion and debate - while yet simultaneously starting threads on such topics, topics that by their very nature are explosively controversial - seems to be missing the point.

Or, perhaps, that is the point.

Announce the action, yet suppress any subsequent discussion.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Or, perhaps, that is the point.

Announce the action, yet suppress any subsequent discussion.

Exactly what I fear

Excellent post above @Scepticalscribe

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Given how this is evolving - namely, how the world of tech, and the worlds of politics, power and governance are becoming increasingly intertwined, - almost conjoined - MR may want to think about - give some thought to - how they wish to address this (that is, if they wish to allow it to be addressed) on the site for the future.

Perhaps a separate sub-section of the forum dedicated to discussion - analysis? - of the influence of Silicon Valley, on the administration (which would also allow for exploration of the converse of this, namely, the notion of an administration regulating Silicon Valley and the tech world) could be considered.

Personally, I think that it is no longer credible or convincing to attempt to argue that tech and politics have nothing in common.

Nevertheless, with the abolition of the old PRSI site - which was where such discussions (arguments etc) took place - it seems to me that rather than successfully corralling what may be considered "politics" into a silo entitled "political news", this now runs the risk of seeping into a great many discussions about tech matters, not least because the current (evolving) political/tech environment ensures that it is increasingly difficult to draw a clear distinction between what is tech, what is politics, and where - why and how - they intersect.

Now, tech platforms may prefer not to address this, and that is their choice.

However, that does not resolve the dilemma of clicks versus controversy.

Moreover, evolving events - in the worlds of politics, and in the worlds of tech, and, above all, that messy area of the Venn Diagram of the Public Sphere where they collide, intersect and overlap with one another - mean that it will become increasingly difficult to avoid allowing some space to acknowledge all of this.

 

[russell_314]

Likely because the chance of that discussion not leading into a hell hole of negative comments is essentially zero. No one would benefit from it.

Exactly this. Political discussion here never ends well. It’s best to avoid it. You can always discuss it on X

 

[turbineseaplane]

Exactly this. Political discussion here never ends well. It’s best to avoid it. You can always discuss it on X

See the post above yours, however

It's becoming nearly impossible to separate out Tech & Politics in this moment ... and moving forward

 

[russell_314]

See the post above yours, however

It's becoming nearly impossible to separate out Tech & Politics in this moment ... and moving forward

Somethings don’t need to be political. Technical tech discussions (say that five times fast) can be without politics. Some people may have a difficult time separating their emotional feelings about politics with the technical aspects, but that’s a personal problem. I agree some things may go into that political realm but not everything. I can discuss iPhone battery life without mentioning children mining cobalt 😂

 

[turbineseaplane]

Somethings don’t need to be political. Technical tech discussions (say that five times fast) can be without politics. Some people may have a difficult time separating their emotional feelings about politics with the technical aspects, but that’s a personal problem. I agree some things may go into that political realm but not everything. I can discuss iPhone battery life without mentioning children mining cobalt 😂

I mean, yeah I get what you're saying generally

More broadly though ... is this good?
(the part of your quote I bolded)

Should we be ignoring the how and why of our technology in that way?

How the sausage is made should be discussed I think

 

[I7guy]

In that case, it occurs to me to ask, why bother starting the thread in the first place?

It would seem to me that there may be something of a dilemma (on the part of owners of the site) between a desire to promote user traffic - i.e. views, clicks, such as is inevitably the case with these topics, threads and titles - which is battling with a desire to avoid controversy on such threads, or a preference not to have to invest the time, effort and energy to engage in moderation of such sections and threads.

Given what is currently happening in that weird nexus where the world of tech - and those who own much of it - and the world of politics and power intersect (and - given current events - nowadays, nobody can argue convincingly or credibly that tech and politics are not linked - for, at the moment, they are conjoined closer than many Siamese twins), to deny discussion and debate - while yet simultaneously starting threads on such topics, topics that by their very nature are explosively controversial - seems to be missing the point.

Or, perhaps, that is the point.

Announce the action, yet suppress any subsequent discussion.

I do not have any issues keeping clear of politics in a non political forum. I don’t understand why it’s so hard.

But to answer your question of why start a thread in the first place? It appears to me not to drive clicks, but to provide a place to do a deep discussion into controversial topics and have those topics contained in one place. Macrumors didn’t sink when PRSI was closed.

As @russell_314 said above: “if you can’t discuss iPhone battery life without bringing in child labor, it’s on you.

 

[turbineseaplane]

Would it be possible, please, for @arn or a moderator to address the question posed as the topic of this thread?

Why is the particular topic of Apple resuming advertising on X such a taboo thing to discuss (even mention!) on the forum?

There are all kinds of super partisan things being discussed, at this very moment, on the forum.

Why is this story specifically not allowed to be discussed?

To some extent this is a functional question, as I'd like to know what's going to be off limits even in the Political News area around this topic as well .... we're going to have lots and lots of discussion around X, Elon, Apple, and how it all intertwines ... for years to come it looks like.

It'd be good to understand what MR isn't going to allow folks to talk about.

Thank you

 

[I7guy]

...

As I suggested in the other thread, there is a time and place for discussions that go beyond the tech. We all can stand for doing the right thing in our lives and inspiring others to do the right things as well. And within the confines of your life you are permitted to be that beacon of light. I would suggest there may be inappropriate times and places to have that expression, one of them here in MacRumors in non-political forums. Another could potentially be at work. For example, mass emailing the entirety of a corporation with some findings on the mining of cobalt may not be appropriate (depending on the type of company one works for).

 

[russell_314]

I mean, yeah I get what you're saying generally

More broadly though ... is this good?
(the part of your quote I bolded)

Should we be ignoring the how and why of our technology in that way?

How the sausage is made should be discussed I think

Yes, I agree it should be discussed but in the proper forum. If it’s a technical forum about what spices to add to the sausage discussing how to properly butcher a pig wouldn’t the place for that discussion.

Also I don’t see a moderated forum as a good place for political discussion of any kind. It’s always going to end badly. When it comes down to it the mods have to make a decision on what’s allowed and what’s not. That decision will always be based on their political leanings. There’s no way to get around this.

 

[WildCowboy]

It was in essence a pragmatic decision. Our moderator staff consists strictly of volunteers, and they already dedicate a significant amount of time and effort to dealing with issues in the forums, whether it be spam, insults, or other behavior that runs afoul of the site rules.

Based on our many years of running a forum site that has at various times allowed and disallowed discussion of political and other potentially controversial topics, and all of the moderation and other efforts that those arrangements entail, we elected a number of years ago to eliminate general discussion of those topics, which had been limited to the Politics, Religion, Social Issues (PRSI) forum.

Knowing that our front-page news coverage sometimes overlaps with such topics, we opted to keep PRSI-related news threads in a dedicated Political News forum with similar posting limitations as we had in the PRSI forum, requiring users to have a certain length of membership and post count to be able to participate in those discussions.

While no system based around cut-and-dried criteria like that is perfect, we've found it successful in striking a reasonable balance between allowing discussion of these newsworthy topics while limiting hit-and-run trolling from new accounts and other issues that are more common with newer members who have less experience with and personal investment in the forum community.

On extremely rare occasions when it's apparent either before or soon after publication that a news thread is simply going to be unmanageable to moderate even in Political News, we can turn off comments entirely, and this was one of those occasions. As far as I can tell, it's the first time in almost two years we've done that for such a reason, but it was obvious to the editorial staff before publication that a dumpster fire was the only way a potential thread on this topic could go.

We don't take such decisions lightly, as we obviously prefer to allow forum members to discuss news stories that are relevant to Apple, but it was simply too much to ask of our moderators to deal with the inevitable outcome of a thread on that topic. A relatively simple one-time cleanup would not have sufficed at any point, and it's just not possible to continually monitor a single thread around the clock to try to keep things in check.

I certainly don't disagree that Apple and politics have become increasingly intertwined, and it has resulted in us having to put more news threads in the Political News forum. Each one of those is a judgment call about how we think a discussion might go, and for borderline decisions where a topic might not be directly political, we also weigh how much effort it may require from our mods to keep the thread strictly on topic by removing political posts versus putting the thread in Political News and allowing for broader discussion.

It's not possible to be perfect in predicting how those things will turn out once a story goes live, so we do sometimes make a change once we see how things are developing. But only in the most extreme cases where we don't see any hope of keeping things within the forum rules without a herculean moderation effort do we disable commenting entirely.

 

[turbineseaplane]

I appreciate the detailed reply @WildCowboy thank you 🙏

 

[KaliYoni]

On extremely rare occasions when it's apparent either before or soon after publication that a news thread is simply going to be unmanageable to moderate even in Political News, we can turn off comments entirely, and this was one of those occasions. As far as I can tell, it's the first time in almost two years we've done that for such a reason, but it was obvious to the editorial staff before publication that a dumpster fire was the only way a potential thread on this topic could go.

I agree with the reasoning behind MR's decision.

Personally, I don't come to MR to hear from activists, to participate in online combat, or to be continually presented with "reminders" about members' views on controversial topics. There are plenty of other venues for all that.

MR acts as a respite and a diversion from the daily news cycle for me. As such, I appreciate MR's efforts to decouple its articles and discussions from PRSI topics as much as possible, while balancing its commitment to the Forum community.

 

[turbineseaplane]

MR acts as a respite and a diversion from the daily news cycle for me. As such, I appreciate MR's efforts to decouple its articles and discussions from PRSI topics as much as possible, while balancing its commitment to the Forum community.

We should recognize though, in light of the world being what it is in 2025 and moving forward, it's going to take almost willful disregard to "just talk tech" while fully removing any of the political and social consequences, angles and components that lead to said products, their implications and outcomes.

This feels especially true with AI coming on, as one example

 

[KaliYoni]

We should recognize though, in light of the world being what it is in 2025 and moving forward, it's going to take almost willful disregard to "just talk tech" while fully removing any of the political and social consequences, angles and components that lead to said products, their implications and outcomes.

This feels especially true with AI coming on, as one example

My view is that the present day is not that different from the rest of human history. Inventions, such as metal weapons, 2-way radios, and the steam engine, and highly desired commodities, such as silk, tea, pepper, and oil, have always driven alliances between private companies, governments, and economic elites that were sometimes beneficial and often destructive. As such, I don’t believe radical shifts in direction for MR’s content or discussion policies are called for on the basis of “extraordinary times”.

Further, I also feel message board posts between strangers on MR have a low potential for causing change or raising awareness for many reasons. My issue-based activities happen in other places using different communication methods.