“The past week’s controversy swirling around Apple’s retroactive ban of sexy apps in the App Store seems trivial, but the implications of Apple’s arbitrariness should be disconcerting to members of the press and those who rely on the media for unbiased information,” Chen writes.
“From a legal perspective, Apple can do whatever it wants with the content in its App Store. Apple is not government, and thus it is not governed by the First Amendment,” Chen writes. “But the lack of bikini-clad ladies in the App Store isn’t the issue here. It’s the fact that Apple has so much market power, combined with the fact that magazine and newspaper publishers are getting pumped to produce apps for Apple’s iPad, which will be served through Apple’s tightly regulated App Store. The iPad could very well play a major role in the future of publishing.”
Chen writes, “I’m optimistic that Apple will eventually create a separate section in iTunes for digital newspapers and magazines, giving publishers a platform to distribute their digital content based on a strict, contractual agreement that prevents their content from being arbitrarily removed at Apple’s discretion. Publishers should be waiting until Apple delivers that platform, rather than whipping up iPad apps and subjecting them to the gauntlet of Apple’s approval process.
Full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Until the day newspapers turn off their websites and go “iPad-only” and/or Apple removes Safari and bans all Web browsers, we wouldn’t worry. For example, we have an app in Apple’s App Store (new version, MDN 2.1, just released!), but we also have a mobile site optimized for iPhone OS devices over which Apple has no control. Publishers don’t even need mobile sites, their regular sites will work just fine (provided their web designers use their heads and eschew Adobe’s shitastic Flash). The news media doesn’t have to go through Apple in order to deliver the news.
“From a legal perspective, Apple can do whatever it wants with the content in its App Store. Apple is not government.”
Yeah, unlike the government, Apple can do whatever it wants.
amazing the amount of ignorance and understanding that journalists and anal-ists continue to prove and manifest about the technology they are supposed to be fluent in….
As I said before, I believe the iPad will have a benefit to balancing news corporations, such as: CNN, CNBC, FOX, etc.
The news corporations are so often removing or bending facts. This little iPad may be able to include and straighten out these corporatioons, at the minumn pause.
What a bunch of hyperbolic drivel.
Funny how things have changed, a month ago the iPad was going to be a total flop now it seems its going to rule the World. Perhaps a little common sense is called for before writing such garbage of whatever extreme.
Testing feedback from iPhone app.
Nothing like serving up a little FUD on a Friday morning.
Gotta do something to stop that stock price rise today.
Brian X Chen: “Darn. Deadline is near. What can I whip up to get hits?”
Intern: “Mr Chen? Want one these McIntosh Apples I bought at the grocer’s yesterday? They’re great!”
Brian X Chen: “Brilliant! I’ll trash Apple. Let’s see. No one has an iPad so I can say anything without worrying about Apple’s legal coming after me. Give that volunteer intern a raise.”
Silly argument. iPad = platform. News = content. Apple can/should have purvue over what apps are available, but unless they remove web capability, then what control could they possibly have?
The real question is: will the news business finally recognize that the dead-tree business model can’t sustain them by itself?
Seems like everyone is in agreement with MDN!
But, this guy might be over the top a bit, but it is no different thinking than when Microsoft was in a more “powerful” mood in the late 90’s. They dictated what the customer, vendors & any other joe & mary could have!
Now don’t get me wrong, is Apple a Microsoft type company, no, but they do have power… does that mean they will abuse it, more likely not, but Apple has to start being careful of any blow back from the developer community, without them, & yes MDN they count, Apple would have devices without any content, which equals little or no sales.
Apple is doing a fine job of the balancing act so far, but not a great job…
nuff said.
None of the analysts and manipulators can really affect a strong business model like Apple over the long term. It will do what it is going to do. This is the advantage of having a $40 Billion war chest. The stock can have little dips and bumps, but Apple will go on doing what it does best: Making money! If you are in for the long haul, you will too!
The iPad has already been projected as a miserable flop that only a few loyal Apple fans will buy, so I don’t see how it could be said that it will rule the news industry. The pundits are certainly inconsistent.
“”Publishers should think twice before worshipping the iPad as the future platform for magazines and newspapers.”
Yes Brian, the last thing publishers need is more readers!
Who said publishers were thinking about stopping the presses and turning off their web sites?!?!
Maybe they should form a committee to study this for a couple of years before acting.
Apple can do what it wants but if Apple is going to function as a content provider then should either be willing to deliver all content with no censorship or allow content to be delivered by alternate channels. That is what happens for music at the moment (Apple devices can play any mp3) but not what happens for iPhone/iPod apps.
I wish I could find some unbiased news. First I would have to decide if it is even possible. I suppose I would like to see the individual authors have access on a par with the big news corporations. Everyone seems to see the world from their own perspective. I would like access to multiple perspectives in a somewhat polished format.
Maybe I just want to read a news service that aligns with my perspective!
Maybe that is why I am so comfortable in the Apple universe. It is controlled, but, it is controlled in the way I would like it to be. The rules seem, for the most part, written with me in mind. It is as if I own the machine, not M$.
My two cents:
If traditional media entrenched in print doesn’t want iPhone/iPad business it’s their loss.
A bunch of talented people will just start their own online magazines based on iPhone OS devices like the iPad (which i believe will be a massive seller).
Traditional media has problems with the iPad (as can be seen in the infighting in NYT) because so many of their staff have vested interests (i.e protecting their jobs)They feel threatened by the new technology. Just one example senior managers whose jobs is to work with printers won’t like going digital. (I remember working as an art director, printing company reps would keep bugging me to take me out for lunch, offer freebies if I gave them work as there is so much money in printing). Not to mention senior managers who are tech phobic (some can barely switch on their PCs).
But if traditional media doesn’t want to adapt I think new startups digital based will be fill in the niche. Some talent (like good reporters etc) will jump ship from sinking pulp based media to the new digital magazines.
This axxhat needs a new tinfoil hat.
Apple hasn’t restricted what I can download into Safari on the iPhone and I wouldn’t expect them to.
Practically every form of mass media comes with some restrictions regarding what is acceptable content. iPhone or iPad apps need not be the exception as long as we have the web, which is the one significant exception to this rule.
Mr Chen’s whole argument assumes that the news is open, free, and uncontrolled. He should read up on the repeal of the “Fairness Doctrine” and the Regan era deregulations based on his conviction that “the news is a business, and business is best capable of deciding what is in the best interest of the US citizen.”
Maybe he is worried that when people can not only read but research the news he will have to compete with real journalist. Not to mention social network shared commentary on what people really think.
“those who rely on the media for unbiased information” … is he serious? Is there really anyone that stupid?
Silly article.
1. The iPhone and iPad both contain browsers – while news organisations publish news via the web every iPhone and iPad user will be able to access anything they like.
2. The iPhone, iPad user base will remain but a fraction of the population at large.
The quality of US journalism requires greater attention than Apple’s contracts…
Apple in charge of the …
What a grand display!!!
Take a look at the Stock app on the iPhone/iPod Touch
select AAPL
rotate the device landscape, and viola …
Now that’s what I’m talking about!!!
[Just waiting for.] the display on my iPad
Yeah silly. Apple wouldn’t ban any news app that referenced an article about porn, would they? Or how about the Sunday girlie spread in the UK newspapers … they wouldn’t ban that from the Appl store would they? Or how about if a certain news outlet chose to entertain anti-religious group editorials … Apple wouldn’t feel pressure to ban anti-semitism or anti-muslim news based apps … or would they?
Blowhards are in charge of the news. The iPad is a game changer.
The article is a bit wrong on one point; that music and films are not censored on the iTunes Store. The hip-hop that I have purchased on iTunes has had lyrics edited to be less offensive, much like it is usually done of free to air television. Films are also edited to be less graphic.
Apple has assumed that a conservative approach to content approval is the safest position for the company from the legal and consumer satisfaction points of view. Like MDN said, it does not stopped censored content from getting on the iPod but I would add that it is not impossible for Apple to extend its censorship standards to the Safari engine (that I assume all other web browsers on the iTunes Store use).