Apple Bans WikiLeaks App From App Store

It is a dark day in the world of the technology chic and savvy. Apple has decided to ban the recent WikiLeaks cable viewing iPhone/iPad application. It would appear we have come full circle. The once revolutionary, avante-garde, free-thinking provocateur, breaking the shackles of technological oppression, and everywhere unleashing the forces of creativity, has taken one step closer towards becoming the well-intentioned but oppressive ruling master, benevolently deciding on matters of import on our behalf.

I've come to understand how very dangerous it is for decision-makers at Apple to unilaterally control what is and what is not allowed on the App Store, especially when such apps do not actually infringe upon any of their terms of service. With power comes responsibility. When the decisions of a decision-making authority benevolently affects it's members, all truly benefit. When they do not, everyone suffers.

Until now, one could reasonably argue that banning certain problematic apps (under the rationale of a curated App Store) were for the benefit of all users, and a superior user experience. All well and good. But this latest decision, in relation to the WikiLeaks cable viewing app, clearly shows Apple is now treading in dangerous territory regarding Constitutionally guaranteed rights and freedoms.

What if I were to release an iPhone app that shows the level of corruption or malfeasance in government, by shining a light on the source of financial contributions of our elected officials? Would Apple ban such an app because a number of powerful but corrupt public servants demanded it, under threat of censure? Precisely which terms of service are being infringed here?

Apple’s official stance on the removal of the WikiLeaks app is that "it violated [their] developer guidelines," according to the New York Times. Apple spokeswoman Trudy Muller added that "[a]pps must comply with all local laws and may not put an individual or group in harm’s way," which suggests that the guideline the developer violated wasn’t the initial one cited which related to charitable donations.

In any case, which local laws are being infringed, and which individuals or groups does such an app put in harm's way? The app is a viewer for WikiLeaks-related Twitter feeds and recently released diplomatic cables widely available on the web. That same information is already being published by a number of highly reputable news organizations, including The New York Times, The Guardian, Der Spiegel, Le Monde, and El Pais, among others. So what's the real issue here?

Decision makers at Apple appear to be bowing to forces that wish to abridge the First Amendment right of free speech, which is essential to a properly functioning democracy. It is evident that banning the WikiLeaks cable viewing app is likely a result of Apple submitting to government pressure under threat of censure as occurred with Visa, MasterCard, PayPal, Amazon, and others. As an Apple user, aficionado, and developer for many years, Apple are perilously close to crossing a line with this recent decision. They risk losing credibility as a pioneering and visionary company that has the interests of it's highly creative, rebellious, and avante-garde user and developer base continuously in sight.

Of course, what I or others think as an individuals is ultimately irrelevant — as it will have essentially no impact on Apple's bottom line. But what enough people think, the power of ideas and information coupled to the power that comes from voting with one's dollar according to one's principles, is another story. When a company makes highly political decisions, they risk alienating large swaths of their customer base who do not share those political views.

When one considers how many creative professionals and open source developers employ the Mac platform as their creative platform of choice, I am sure we will see in due course, that informed, thoughtful, creative, and free-thinking individuals will not accept such policy decisions lightly. The demographics of these peoples, by their very nature, precludes them from being oblivious for very long to transgressions against their Constitutionally protected rights and freedoms — an underlying source of creative endeavour. And when thoughtful creative people lash out, watch out! Hell hath no fury like a creative's scorn. Apple is treading on dangerous ground indeed.

Perhaps the single most important factor that provides Apple some breathing room over such ill-advised policy decisions is the insanely brilliant level of product innovation. Enough for many of its users, and probably employees, to simply turn a blind eye towards the less agreeable aspects of high-level decision making, at least for now. As far as products go, they have the Midas touch. For Apple's sake (and ours) let's hope that level of product innovation continues.

References:

1. Bryan Schuetz, "Why was the WikiLeaks App Pulled from the App Store?" GigaOm
2. Alexia Tsotsis, "Apple Removes WikiLeaks App From App Store," TechCrunch
3. Bianca Bosker, "WikiLeaks App Removed From App Store," Huffington Post
4. Michael Grothaus, "Apple Pulls WikiLeaks App from the App Store," Tuaw
5. Brian Osborne, "Apple Pulls WikiLeaks App from the App Store," Geek.com