Posted on 11/29/2022 7:24:36 PM PST by SmokingJoe
The Twitter owner’s latest fight is a big one: the market dominance of Apple’s App Store.
Elon Musk has been unafraid of picking fights, whether with prominent politicians, political whistle-blowers or his own employees. But in taking on Apple on Monday, the Twitter owner was trying to start a brawl that could have ramifications stretching from Silicon Valley to Washington.
Mr. Musk complained that Apple had paused most of its advertising on Twitter, continuing his berating of companies that have done so. But it’s his allegation that Apple “threatened to withhold Twitter from its App Store but won’t tell us why” that could prove more important.
Apple is a major source of ad dollars for Twitter. It was the biggest advertiser on the platform in the year’s first quarter, spending $48 million, according to The Washington Post.
Mr. Musk’s App Store allegation resurrects a potent charge against Apple: that it has used access to millions of iPhone and iPad devices as a cudgel to extract more money from app makers. A key part of Mr. Musk’s plans for Twitter is collecting more revenue from subscriptions — but under Apple’s policies, up to 30 percent of those sales from iPhone users would go to Apple itself. (“Did you know Apple puts a secret 30% tax on everything you buy through their App Store?” Mr. Musk tweeted.)
But Mr. Musk has also pitched his complaint in bombastically broader terms, calling it “a battle for the future of civilization.” (Twitter’s former head of public safety, Yoel Roth, wrote in a recent Times guest essay that Apple’s and Google’s app stores do prohibit certain kinds of content, and that failure to adhere to those rules — including by allowing certain kinds of material on the Twitter app — “would be catastrophic” to Twitter’s business.)
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
NYT should tell what abut the outcome of the match of David versus Goliath.
David picked up five smooth stones. Musk apparently has a couple.
“Apple is a major source of ad dollars for Twitter. It was the biggest advertiser on the platform in the year’s first quarter, spending $48 million...”
Apple has no obligation, moral, ethical or legal to continue advertising on Twitter.
>> bombastically broader terms, calling it “a battle for the future of civilization.”
‘bombastically’ used in a pejorative way — unlike the well-received hyperbolic threats of the ‘climate change’
He boned Lockheed, ULA and Boeing in the rocket biz with a vehicle that is without dispute now the world leader.
He boned GM, Ford and all of Japan & Germany with the most successful new motor/fuel technology introduction in 100 years.
His satellite constellation is already doing well in a space that nobody in the telecom biz thought could ever work after the failure of Globalstar and Iridium.
The fading, aging has been operation known as the rotting Apple should be very, very nervous.
But as a duopoly over a critical service with Google it does at the very least have an obligation to treat Twitter fairly with regards to App Store access (they had no problem with hosting Truth Social and a bunch of other similar apps not to mention preMusk twitter when it was hosting illegal porn and violence but suddenly twitter is a problem) or we should look seriously whether we should allow them to keep having this level of control over us.
NYT is not an independent misinformation source.
All the lib tw**s, uh tweeters would rather it be destroyed than allow actual factual conversations and opposing view points to be presented. They can phu cough!
True.
But that is a different matter from banning Twitter from the app store cause Musk promotes free speech.
Apple should not complain when the same thing that happened to Disney happens to them. Musk has 120 million very loyal followers on Twitter, who are busy trashing Apple as we speak.
He boned GM, Ford and all of Japan & Germany with the most successful new motor/fuel technology introduction in 100 years.
His satellite constellation is already doing well in a space that nobody in the telecom biz thought could ever work after the failure of Globalstar and Iridium.
The fading, aging has been operation known as the rotting Apple should be very, very nervous.
All true. Good post.
Apple Twitter Tesla Amazon Google Facebook and Microsoft are not real companies. They are NGOs. Which is to say they are supported by our federal government like Freddy Mac or Fanny Mae. But they are not obeying the laws or restrictions of a government department. They are outside the government but they are controlled by the government. They have grown without profits and they have not had the constraints of other companies because our government loved their spying capability. They loved their tracking of people and the satellites of Spacex which produces a communications network everywhere in the world even over Russia, even over China. These companies allow our swamp to spy on us and the world without “breaking the law”. They are as illegal as those crossing the Reo Grande.
These are the generals (Trump, Musk, DeSantis, Paul, and more on the way) who are calling up troops to do battle against our common enemies: outrageous and unconstitutional government, woke culture, moral idolatry, deep state corruption, atheist mainstream churches, the MSM, Marxist university culture, the Democrat progressive party, the FED, woke industry, and more....
Your post is priceless.
So, Apple is against Twitter allowing more free speech?
I am glad I never buy i-Phones. Overpriced useless toys.
Nonense.
They have grown without profits
Apple, Google and Microsoft are about the most profitable companies in history.
Why do you constantly keep posting this nonsense?
“So, Apple is against Twitter allowing more free speech?”
It appears that Apple is exercising its own free speech by not advertising on Twitter.
David won.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.