LifeSite News: Why I have Not Signed The Petition

 

Apple News has banned LifeSite News. 

The site has posted a petition to “respectfully” ask Apple to please, please be allowed in.

I disagree with the ban (obviously), but I have not signed the petition.

People thinking that LifeSite is unworthy of being published on its platform because it “shows intolerance” (of course it does; everyone does; Apple shows intolerance towards LifeSite banning them!) are basic enemies of Christianity. It is perfectly useless to try to reason with that lot.

The question is a different one: Apple News is acting like an editor, not a news platform, and should have all the responsibilities linked to it.

I am not angry that LifeSite is not on the internet page of MSNBC. They do their own stuff and decide themselves to whom they want to give space. I am angry when the free flow of information is throttled for ideological reasons by people who act as gateways of thought.

It is as if a company opened a motorway, and then decided whom they want on it. Arguably, it is more important than this, because it can be argued that freedom of speech is even more important than freedom of movement.

This is another example of Big Tech acting as Big Nanny. Already the idea that “intolerance” may, in itself, be unacceptable tells you the blank stupidity of these people. There is no one who is not intolerant towards things, people or behaviour he finds intolerable. We find abortion intolerable, they find being prevented from killing a baby in the womb intolerable.

The solution for this is not begging the evil guy to please be a bit less evil for once. The solution for this is recognise the danger that tech companies pose to Western Freedoms and act accordingly, forcing every company to choose if it wants to operate as a news platform (and be forced to refrain from any sort of censorship), or as an editor (and then controlling the information, but answering for it).

For the time being, reflect on the way Apple tries to control you and whether it deserves your money. Whilst all big tech companies are evil, some are less evil than others. For example, Android is an open platform. It might be more difficult for me to download an app that is not on their store; but if I want to do it, I can do it anyway. On a proprietary system like Apple this does not happen, which is why the Manhattan Declaration never found its way to an iPhone.

Let us stop being nice people begging for a place at the table. LifeSite should start to incessantly demand that Apple be broken up or forced to act as an editor (and I would say there is merit for breaking it up as a Company anyway) instead of kindly petitioning for entrance in the halls of Mordor.

It is not that, if Apple changes its mind, the problem goes away. If Apple changes its mind it will only be a bone thrown to the dogs, so that they do not understand how bad things really are for them.

Enough with petitioning.

Over to you, AG Barr.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Posted on August 2, 2019, in Catholicism, Conservative Catholicism, Traditional Catholicism. Bookmark the permalink. 5 Comments.

  1. Agree. All out war against Big Tech is the right approach. They do evil and block good.

  2. Agree with your primary points, but I signed because if enough of these happen with enough people signing, perhaps (and I know it’s a long shot) the evil techies will see a threat to their bottom line. This is, in the end, all they really care about. Even so, there definitely is a need for some antitrust and regulatory oversight here. Never thought I would say that. I worked in telecom for over 30 years and regarded most government regulation as unnecessary and an economic mistake, and I still view the US antitrust enforcement structure as questionable, at best. But “any port in a storm” seems to make sense here.

  3. Well said.

  1. Pingback: Canon212 Update: Why This ‘Definitely Pope’ Faithful Catholic Media? – The Stumbling Block

%d bloggers like this: