5 ms·

Interesting that this never happened to John Oliver with all of the trash he famously talked about AT&T, and more recently Warner/Discovery. It looks like the b

Interesting that this never happened to John Oliver with all of the trash he famously talked about AT&T, and more recently Warner/Discovery. It looks like the bar Apple just knocked their teeth out on was set pretty low.

lotsofpulp 3y ago
Apple has a lot more to lose than ATT. I do not see why Apple shareholders would want any of that risk. Anyone can publish content critical of China or whatever online, it does not need to come from Apple.
- mission_failed 3y ago
  Doubtless the censorship also extends to publishing apps that are critical of topics Apple relies on for profit. A walled garden of Apple approved thought
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    Then host the topics on websites.
- Robotbeat 3y ago
  Most US smartphones are Apple, now. Content increasingly being withheld from the broader internet and confined to apps. Apps which Apple has discretion over.
  - lotsofpulp 3y ago
    Who is stopping content on the “broader” internet? Does iOS block certain videos from playing in the browser?
    - jabradoodle 3y ago
      Confined != Blocked Countless hours are spent consuming content on platforms controlled by a tiny number of people.
      - lotsofpulp 3y ago
        And? The point is Jon Stewart can make his own website and sell his content, and people using Apple’s devices can consume it. And it is pretty frictionless, all people have to do is type or search for the website address.
        jabradoodle 3y ago
        It's really not complicated, lots of people's attention consuming content, and lots of people's time producing content is focused on major platforms that censor for political reasons, this is sub optimal. Yes, the internet still exits and you can use it, I am aware of that.
TechRemarker 3y ago
Trash talking AT&T / Warner I would consider a very low bar, vs trash talking China and the value of China for Apple would seem existentially larger. If Apple views AI as the cornerstone of their future offerings then that would also seem massive compared to poking fun at a content company.
- excalibur 3y ago
  Well AT&T is ostensibly a telecom. ;) You're right that this content is potentially more damaging to Apple's interests than anything Oliver said. The low bar I was referring to was "be better than AT&T". Or than David Zaslav, who waltzed in the door and killed all the content people liked.
klabb3 3y ago
> It looks like the bar Apple just knocked their teeth out on was set pretty low. Indeed, Jon Stewart talking about China and AI is an incredibly low bar for censorship. Plus, it wouldn't be hard for him to build an audience with a different network or even on his own. I'm surprised that tech companies are entering media at all. The mysterious echelons in the board rooms are obsessed with PR and HR messaging, and Apple is even more notorious with secrecy, compartmentalization and an appearance of total external coherence. In fact, that's arguably their biggest strength when it comes to design and product. Now, when a company like Apple enters entertainment, you need a lot more diversity of thought. Nobody wants to watch the same thing over and over, not even "normies". I believe legacy media as well as HBO, Netflix etc, "get it" to a larger extent. Sure, they have conflicts of interest (e.g. The Dissident that few wanted to touch because of Saudi relations). But, they have a base-level awareness of the rules of engagement, and at least a moderately thicker skin.
permo-w 3y ago
it's a good point. there are two solutions to this problem. a) you do what they have done and cancel the show, thereby setting an unpleasant precedent of having to police content, or b) you say that we do not enforce a company line on our TV shows, and you save a lot of future hassle this dichotomy makes me strongly think that this decision has little relation to AI and has come straight from the CCP. realistically Jon Stewart criticising AI is going to negligibly affect their bottom line. at worst they get mocked in the press and a small segment of very principled opinionated people may not buy an iPhone. at best they come across as fair and unbiased by allowing seemingly antithetical viewpoints on their platform. if the CCP weren't involved, I think they take that risk. the CCP can hugely affect their bottom-line, not only in customer-base, but massively in the supply-chain too
jameshart 3y ago
AT&T/Warner Discovery/HBO are comfortable participating in the occasional light comedy roast that John Oliver subjects them to, because it shows they’re a good sport and doesn’t do them any harm. There’s also more of an arms length brand relationship at play here. John Oliver doing a segment on FIFA corruption on HBO is hardly going to register as a concern when Eurosport, AT&T SportsNet and TNT Sports are negotiating soccer broadcast rights contracts… while a ‘Stream Now’ button on a Problem With Jon Stewart title card appearing on the front page of Apple.com is a lot less ambiguous when you’re revisiting the terms of your joint venture with the Chinese government.
cableshaft 3y ago
Well AT&T and Warner/Discovery own the show, so one significant difference is it's a joke about just their company that they can determine if they're okay with or not, and don't have to worry about losing anything due to external third party retaliation. Whereas with a topic about China, that's a whole government that has a history of not being able to take a joke, and will likely retaliate and cost Apple a significant amount of money. Not saying it's good or right, though. John Oliver also had a whole show about China and their treatment of Uighurs, though, so that seems to be a more direct comparison. That aired back in 2020 and his show hasn't been cancelled yet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17oCQakzIl8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17oCQakzIl8

lotsofpulp 3y ago

Apple has a lot more to lose than ATT. I do not see why Apple shareholders would want any of that risk. Anyone can publish content critical of China or whatever online, it does not need to come from Apple.

mission_failed 3y ago
Doubtless the censorship also extends to publishing apps that are critical of topics Apple relies on for profit. A walled garden of Apple approved thought
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Then host the topics on websites.
Robotbeat 3y ago
Most US smartphones are Apple, now. Content increasingly being withheld from the broader internet and confined to apps. Apps which Apple has discretion over.
- lotsofpulp 3y ago
  Who is stopping content on the “broader” internet? Does iOS block certain videos from playing in the browser?
  - jabradoodle 3y ago
    Confined != Blocked Countless hours are spent consuming content on platforms controlled by a tiny number of people.
    - lotsofpulp 3y ago
      And? The point is Jon Stewart can make his own website and sell his content, and people using Apple’s devices can consume it. And it is pretty frictionless, all people have to do is type or search for the website address.
      - jabradoodle 3y ago
        It's really not complicated, lots of people's attention consuming content, and lots of people's time producing content is focused on major platforms that censor for political reasons, this is sub optimal. Yes, the internet still exits and you can use it, I am aware of that.

TechRemarker 3y ago

Trash talking AT&T / Warner I would consider a very low bar, vs trash talking China and the value of China for Apple would seem existentially larger. If Apple views AI as the cornerstone of their future offerings then that would also seem massive compared to poking fun at a content company.

excalibur 3y ago
Well AT&T is ostensibly a telecom. ;) You're right that this content is potentially more damaging to Apple's interests than anything Oliver said. The low bar I was referring to was "be better than AT&T". Or than David Zaslav, who waltzed in the door and killed all the content people liked.

klabb3 3y ago

> It looks like the bar Apple just knocked their teeth out on was set pretty low. Indeed, Jon Stewart talking about China and AI is an incredibly low bar for censorship. Plus, it wouldn't be hard for him to build an audience with a different network or even on his own. I'm surprised that tech companies are entering media at all. The mysterious echelons in the board rooms are obsessed with PR and HR messaging, and Apple is even more notorious with secrecy, compartmentalization and an appearance of total external coherence. In fact, that's arguably their biggest strength when it comes to design and product. Now, when a company like Apple enters entertainment, you need a lot more diversity of thought. Nobody wants to watch the same thing over and over, not even "normies". I believe legacy media as well as HBO, Netflix etc, "get it" to a larger extent. Sure, they have conflicts of interest (e.g. The Dissident that few wanted to touch because of Saudi relations). But, they have a base-level awareness of the rules of engagement, and at least a moderately thicker skin.

permo-w 3y ago

it's a good point. there are two solutions to this problem. a) you do what they have done and cancel the show, thereby setting an unpleasant precedent of having to police content, or b) you say that we do not enforce a company line on our TV shows, and you save a lot of future hassle this dichotomy makes me strongly think that this decision has little relation to AI and has come straight from the CCP. realistically Jon Stewart criticising AI is going to negligibly affect their bottom line. at worst they get mocked in the press and a small segment of very principled opinionated people may not buy an iPhone. at best they come across as fair and unbiased by allowing seemingly antithetical viewpoints on their platform. if the CCP weren't involved, I think they take that risk. the CCP can hugely affect their bottom-line, not only in customer-base, but massively in the supply-chain too

jameshart 3y ago

AT&T/Warner Discovery/HBO are comfortable participating in the occasional light comedy roast that John Oliver subjects them to, because it shows they’re a good sport and doesn’t do them any harm. There’s also more of an arms length brand relationship at play here. John Oliver doing a segment on FIFA corruption on HBO is hardly going to register as a concern when Eurosport, AT&T SportsNet and TNT Sports are negotiating soccer broadcast rights contracts… while a ‘Stream Now’ button on a Problem With Jon Stewart title card appearing on the front page of Apple.com is a lot less ambiguous when you’re revisiting the terms of your joint venture with the Chinese government.

cableshaft 3y ago

Well AT&T and Warner/Discovery own the show, so one significant difference is it's a joke about just their company that they can determine if they're okay with or not, and don't have to worry about losing anything due to external third party retaliation. Whereas with a topic about China, that's a whole government that has a history of not being able to take a joke, and will likely retaliate and cost Apple a significant amount of money. Not saying it's good or right, though. John Oliver also had a whole show about China and their treatment of Uighurs, though, so that seems to be a more direct comparison. That aired back in 2020 and his show hasn't been cancelled yet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17oCQakzIl8 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=17oCQakzIl8