|
While I'm usually on the other side of this point, crying foul when people whine that the slightest bit of private selectivity is 'censorship' and needs to sued, stopped by force, bypassed as civil disobedience, taken to the Supreme Court, etc., I think it equally wrong to NOT call this censorship. Governments are NOT the only folks who can censor. TV networks and movie studios censor, people self-censor for propriety and diplomacy all the time.
"Censorship" is not a dirty word, and it's not illegal in this context. Don't be afraid to apply the correct word just because some people jump to extreme conclusions about it's political import.
Don't make it the next "N" word.
The actions by Apple described in the OP were clearly censorship and it's OK to say so. Just understand that the recourse for this kind of censorship (if you disagree with it) would be to shop elsewhere and let the management know why, and maybe even organize a boycott if enough people feel strongly about it. Not to whine about how the Man is putting you down and how it's a violation of your civil rights....
|