Apple's Tireless Censors

I haven't had a chance to check out The Manhattan Declaration, the Christian iPhone app that spreads a message in defense of traditional marriage. That's because Apple banned it from its app store, after 7,700 people signed a petition urging its removal on the grounds that the app is, allegedly, homophobic.

I can safely say that I'm not exactly a homophobe.

But it bothers me greatly that I can't see for myself what the fuss is about.

It bothers me that other people are no longer allowed to download the app and make up their own minds either.

It bothers me that the free flow of information is inhibited for reasons that seem arbitrary, petty, and even counterproductive to me.

It bothers me that the atheist website the Freethinker, which after all has the words free and think in its name, believes that the ban is a reason to gloat.

And it bothers me that even fairly mainstream ideas about the undesirability of gay marriage (though I sure as hell don't share those ideas) may be locked out from Apple's tiresome monopoly, because that censorious action promotes the idea that somehow it's best to try to push controversial opinions underground.

It's silly to fear the words of religionists (better to engage them and refute their arguments). And it's dangerous to try to ban those expressions altogether, because if you do, the law of unintended consequences holds that you may be next.

Previous Nobody's Business coverage of Apple's deep-running nanny streak here, here, and here.

Comments

[yoshi]

Apple is a private company. Its free to limit what is in its own store. You are free not to buy Apple products.

And their "ideas" aren't pushed underground. Take your iPad, iPhone, Android, Blackberry or other mobile device and go to www.manhattandeclaration.org. It will detect you are on a mobile device and optimize the screen for you appropriately.

You are then free to sign the declaration as you see fit. I signed "Santa Clause".

So your argument is complete bullshit. And freethinker? Stopped paying attention to them a while ago.

[Rogier]

Yoshi:

I addressed your (generic) objection here, the one about this matter involving a private-sector company that can do what it wants:

http://www.bakelblog.com/nobodys_business/2007/06/official_nannie.html

and here:

http://www.bakelblog.com/nobodys_business/2007/06/official_vs_fre.html

Also, it's a bit odd, I think, to just turn a blind eye when a company like Apple declares an entire medium off-limits to certain kinds of speech. Apple controls the App Store and there are no other viable, Apple-approved channels for people to buy software for their iPhones, iPods, and iPads. That makes Apple a de facto monopolist, controlling the entire field of software for more than 140 million mobile devices.

You point out that the people who publish The Manhattan Declaration can get their message out through the web, but that's just not the same thing as an app, is it? Different features, different user experience. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't make the same argument about a book — that's it's OK to ban a book because hell, you can go to the author's website and find out approximately what he wrote about.

The rest of your comment is a strawman. I never said people can't sign the petition without owning the app.

[Phelps]

Freethinker doesn't mean the same thing that is did at one time anymore. It's part of Newspeak now. You know how to interpret those words.