tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post7823101423046442728..comments2024-01-09T17:16:02.647+07:00Comments on JOTMAN: Apple removes WikiLeaks from App StoreJotmanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-40604835706270664922012-09-03T08:48:08.307+07:002012-09-03T08:48:08.307+07:00Jack,
Why not leave bullshit to corporate PR? ...Jack, <br /><br />Why not leave bullshit to corporate PR? <br /><br />By denying approval of WikiLeaks apps, Apple restricts public access to historically and politically important information. That's the outcome. You are free to make up all kinds of excuses for Apple, but I take it even you are not disputing the injury.<br /><br />To say Apple's motivation is the only criteria for crying out "censorship" is a cop-out. As Edmund Burke said, all that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing. If, by playing CYA, you're abetting censorship, then you're abetting censorship. You're an accomplice to it. <br /><br />Institutionally, CYA is precisely how any censorship agenda gets advanced. However, there's more to consider here. As a large technology company, Apple benefits from a collegial relationship with government. From Apple's perspective, the less transparency, the less the public knows about the nature of its lobbying, its tax-evasion agenda, outsourcing, executive salaries, environmental exploitation (Congo rare earths, toxic waste disposal, etc), cooperation in surveillance (NSA), the better. Apple's senior management and large shareholders have demonstrable vested financial interests in less-than-transparent government. <br /><br />Where does a company the size of Apple end and the state begin? The boundaries are less than clear. I would argue it's as much in Apple's interest to censor government whistle-blowers as the government's. Jotmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02485510513271661365noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-83098474666957760162012-09-01T20:35:52.157+07:002012-09-01T20:35:52.157+07:00Yeah, I'm gonna call BS on this. Apple may be ...Yeah, I'm gonna call BS on this. Apple may be heavy-handed and Big Brother-like in its management of it's App stores but this is not censorship, it's corporate CYA. Censorship would be if Apple blocked you from accessing WikiLeaks data. It doesn't; as long as you can still open a browser and get to information, you're not being censored. Apple is merely saying it's not going to be an active participant. And to lump them in with financial companies that actually worked to quash WikiLeaks is disingenuous. Jack Humanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17674306515259944949noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-68716943057085148452010-12-25T20:49:00.609+07:002010-12-25T20:49:00.609+07:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5491095.post-90380491505491856282010-12-23T05:56:46.365+07:002010-12-23T05:56:46.365+07:00I am hardly suprised. Apple devices always seemed ...I am hardly suprised. Apple devices always seemed to have been designed to think (perhaps differently) for their owners.<br /><br />S.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com