Re:Apple Denies Free Political Speech
by snewe on Saturday May 22, 2010 @01:32PM
(#1370691)
Although I can't say I agree with Apple's decision, people forget that free speech doesn't apply here. Apple owns the means to get on the App Store. They can decide what suits the platform in whatever way they see fit. In some sense, the right that Apple has to do this -- own and rent a "podium," the App Store -- is also free speech.
Re:Apple Denies Free Political Speech
by yafujifide on Saturday May 22, 2010 @01:53PM
(#1370711)
The Bill of Rights originally applied only to the federal government, and was later applied to the states. Perhaps we should also make it apply to corporations?
Re:Apple Denies Free Political Speech
by snewe on Saturday May 22, 2010 @02:12PM
(#1370752)
Not sure what you mean by "apply to corporations." Free speech is basically an extension of property rights. If you own a piece of land, you can stand on it and do and say almost anything (other than incite a riot, etc.) you want. Corporations are legal entities owned by the same people that have the aforementioned rights. If the gov't limits the freedom of speech of corporations, it limits the freedom of its shareholder owners.
Re:Apple Denies Free Political Speech
by Judson on Saturday May 22, 2010 @01:28PM
(#1370682)
You can't blame Apple for trying to keep the App Store free of negative political campaigning. If it was me, I would keep it free from politics altogether.
Re:Apple Denies Free Political Speech
by binarymax on Saturday May 22, 2010 @01:24PM
(#1370662)
TRIED TO STRANGLE family farms with insane Soviet-Style regulation
Seems pretty alarmist to me. STRANGLE, insane, Soviet.
I'm not for or against Mr. David, but maybe instead of using scary words and saying how awful he thinks his opponent is, might he consider running on his own positive merits and achievements?
Re:Apple Denies Free Political Speech
by jrockway on Saturday May 22, 2010 @01:28PM
(#1370683)
Yeah, his "facts" are pretty weak. "Would have" caused gas to be $7 a gallon? Last time I checked, there is no time machine that predicts the future, and this is speculation, not fact.
This guy is filled with nothing but negativity, so I don't really blame Apple for rejecting the app. It provides no value to the platform. But, to be fair, censorship is pretty bad too. (Arguably, to be censorship, you have to be trying to say something, where clearly this guy has nothing to say. He just uses words with negative connotations and relates them to an opponent. Yawn. People caught onto this like 20 years ago, dude.)
Also, perhaps a more relevant question: who the fuck downloads a cell phone app to read about a specific politician?
Seems pretty alarmist to me. STRANGLE, insane, Soviet.
I'm not for or against Mr. David, but maybe instead of using scary words and saying how awful he thinks his opponent is, might he consider running on his own positive merits and achievements?
This guy is filled with nothing but negativity, so I don't really blame Apple for rejecting the app. It provides no value to the platform. But, to be fair, censorship is pretty bad too. (Arguably, to be censorship, you have to be trying to say something, where clearly this guy has nothing to say. He just uses words with negative connotations and relates them to an opponent. Yawn. People caught onto this like 20 years ago, dude.)
Also, perhaps a more relevant question: who the fuck downloads a cell phone app to read about a specific politician?
Yup, you got it. Let's hope it backfires.