Apple Cancelled Jon Stewart Because Feckless Tech Executives Were Afraid Of The Pesky Truth
from the what-editorial-firewall dept
Last week, the New York Times reported that Apple had cancelled “The Problem With Jon Stewart.” More importantly, the Times noted that Apple executives, clearly not at all worried about the need for a healthy editorial firewall, had grown uncomfortable with the way that the program was planning to cover issues such as China and AI:
“Mr. Stewart and Apple executives had disagreements over some of the topics and guests on “The Problem,” two of the people said. Mr. Stewart told members of his staff on Thursday that potential show topics related to China and artificial intelligence were causing concern among Apple executives, a person with knowledge of the meeting said. As the 2024 presidential campaign begins to heat up, there was potential for further creative disagreements, one of the people said.”
It’s an embarrassing and ridiculous look for Apple, whose global expansion ambitions were in no way meaningfully threatened by a talk show that hadn’t seen widespread success. But both the Times story and this follow up Hollywood Reporter story make it abundantly clear that Apple executives thought they could bully Stewart into softening his coverage of key tech issues:
Sources tell THR that there had been tension between Apple and Stewart ahead of the show’s third season return over topics featured on The Problem. Those same sources note that Apple approached Stewart and informed the host that both sides needed to be “aligned” regarding topics on the show. Stewart, sources say, balked at the idea of being “hamstrung” by Apple, which threatened to cancel the series. Stewart, sources say, wanted to have full creative control of the series and, after Apple threatened to cancel the series, told the tech company that he was walking away from the show rather than have his hands tied.
You genuinely don’t see business decisions this myopically stupid very often. Sure, CNET once refused to give Dish Network a CES award because its parent company at the time (CBS) was engaged in a legal fight over ad-skipping. And there was that time that Verizon tried to launch a news empire but then banned its “reporters” from covering issues like net neutrality or mass surveillance.
But generally speaking, even the dumbest tech sector executives know that it’s an extremely bad look to engage in this kind of heavy-handed meddling with journalistic integrity. Especially given that nothing Stewart could have possibly said about China or the AI hype cycle isn’t being said at a hundred other news outlets, many of which have significantly larger reach.
It’s a lovely example of how tech companies won’t be saving journalism anytime soon because they simply lack the ethics or integrity for the job.
There’s no shortage of tech billionaires and executives, like Elon Musk, who see critical journalism as a mortal enemy that’s out to unfairly get them, not as an essential function of a healthy society. Then there’s a parade of other tech executives (many of whom own media companies) who just don’t care; they prefer news simulacrum — something that looks news-ish and is peppered with the kind of shallow techno-optimism guys like Marc Andreessen prefer, but generally doesn’t ask hard questions or look under the hood.
Apple’s decision comes at a time when U.S. journalism is increasingly on its back foot thanks to decades of incompetent mismanagement and layoffs. It also comes at a time when propaganda and disinformation routinely see as much if not more reach than many traditional news organizations. The result is a dumber, more divided public and even a measurable shift in electoral outcomes.
Tech giants may be financially well positioned to help in the ongoing fight between foundational truth and delusion. But not, apparently, if doing so requires the slightest bit of ethical backbone. What U.S. journalism desperately needs are leaders with bold new ideas for creative new journalism funding models that scale. What it’s getting instead is a rotating crop of the biggest, thinnest-skinned babies imaginable.
Filed Under: ai, china, comedy, free speech, jon stewart, journalism, propaganda
Companies: apple
Comments on “Apple Cancelled Jon Stewart Because Feckless Tech Executives Were Afraid Of The Pesky Truth”
Bully Jon Stewart?
“Apple executives thought they could bully Stewart into softening his coverage of key tech issues”
Had they watched his show once or twice, they might have realized this was not going to work.
I honestly feel that Mr. Stewart would be just fine do his own Youtube channel. He has such a large following. I say large, really it is a cult following almost. I personally love the guy. I would think he would make a good member of congress but know that he would have issue with both sides of the isle as he is definitely for the people far more than the average congressman.
Re:
What is this cult of which you speak? I must be living under a rock because I do not see the cult behaviors amongst those who watch Jon Stewart. I do however see such behavior from Trump supporters.
“Cult is a term, in most contexts pejorative, for a relatively small group which is typically led by a charismatic and self-appointed leader, who excessively controls its members, requiring unwavering devotion to a set of beliefs and practices which are considered deviant (outside the norms of society)”
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cult
Re: Re:
This meaning (oxford dictionaries, but similar in wiktionary and dictionary.com)
“a person or thing that is popular or fashionable among a particular group or section of society.
‘the series has become a bit of a cult in the UK'”
Re: Re: Re:
It is a dynamic language but sometimes Bad really means Bad.
The worst example of definitions changing might be the word literal and how it now can mean figuratively, the opposite of literal.
Re: Re: Re:2
But in this context it does not.
The definition of literal has not changed, but the number of really dumb people using it has increased.
Re: Re: Re:2
Both the older and more recent implications of “cult” do not have the “really Bad” meaning. Actually, the is only one sense of the word that implies bad things, and many which do not. If you want to be nit-picky language police, at least be right.
i’m just going back to watching the cult classic Plan 9 From Outer Space, thanks.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re:
“Wow, this guy has a big following!”
“DAE TRUMP????”
Are you stupid?
Re: Re:
Less cult, more big fanbase.
Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, you can’t really say someone that famous has a “cult following” because the phrase, in reference to pop culture and media in general, implies a small-but-loyal fanbase. John Waters could be said to have a cult following; Jon Stewart, not so much.
Re: Re:
I didn’t want to say huge because there is a large portion of the world that hates him or has no idea he exists and lacked an appropriate term. It was indeed my mistake.
Re: Re:
Have you seriously never heard or read the term “cult following”?
Re:
Yeah, because there’s no way a big tech company like, say, Google, would try to interfere with whatever he put out on such a channel.
Re: Re:
Well, not so overtly, right? Google would make it look like incompetence, or that someone else was to blame (“three strikes” for copyright could be easily arranged if Stewart ever dealt with music or movies). Netflix would cancel it for no fucking reason, as is their wont—one more body among foundations. It’s rather surprising that Apple would actually say that it’s because Jon was making them look bad.
Re: Re: Re:
It’s like they had no idea who Stewart was, and were maybe only hiring based on market research. To quote Anthony Jeselnik: “I assume you guys all knew who you were coming to see tonight. But if you didn’t, you sure as shit know now.”
Re: Re: Re:2
“We bought him, he should do what we want,” said the people who never sell and only license things.
You may as well wish for unicorns
A dumber public is the goal, since it is easier to make money from them.
As it so happens, the Daily Show needs a new host. Just sayin’.
Re:
And Jon Stewart is now on Youtube AND Twitch!
re: techno-optimism: I’m plenty optimistic about technology. It’s neat. The problem is people using it for unethical, short-sighted, and selfish purposes, from planned obsolescence to mass surveillance. I’m all for advancing science and technology but there’s no single magical panacea that enough VC money will uncover and thereby fix the human condition.
Re: Money problem
I do think Venture Capitalist money is the source of much op the societal problems with technology. VC money is employed to make the billionaires richer at the cost of the poorer 90% of the population.
Re: technology
Technology can be useful and neat (it can also be dangerous and dehumanizing, but that’s for another day). “The problem is people using it for unethical, short-sighted, and selfish purposes”. Those people are often the ones who own and control the tech companies, and whose primary goal is to amass wealth and power for their company and themselves. Such as in the current instance.
Tech companys think news is not worth the trouble of possibly getting sued for posting links in canada or having to employ staff to moderate on sensitive topics like the mideast war
they can get views without posting serious news articles
China provides a large part of apples profit plus most iphones are made there
apple prefers to make drama or comedy tv programs
that do not risk annoying china to making
serious current affairs news programs
look to websites like drudge or huff post or even cnn mnbc tv for seriouse news
Re:
I’d do the “let me laugh even harder” bit, but seeing those two phrases in the same sentence is less funny and more sad.
Re: Re:
Why laugh? Drudge’s front page infamously looks like dog shit but if I was bored and wanted a bunch of politics from different places thrown in my face, it doesn’t seem too bad as news aggregators go.
Re: Re: Re:
It is one thing to know the source’s bias.
It’s another to unironically suggest CNN or Matt Drudge is less biased than, ler’s say, the BBC or Reuters.
You might want to actually breathe some fresh air instead of whatever it is you’re huffing.
Re:
So, look to actual disinfo sites or Hedge fund subsidiaries for “news”?
Either you’re trolling, legit serious or worse, a wumao.
Re: Re:
Not for nothin’, man, but your overusage of “wumao” makes me think you’re using it as a cover for racism against Chinese people.
Re: Re: Re:
No, I’m using it as a descriptor for the Chinese and their army of disinfo agents. That is what they call them, on account of them allegedly being paid fifty cents per disinfo post.
They have a big ass army of disinfo agents, some of them are actually overseas.
And, well, the Russians are effectively a Chinese tributary.
Would you prefer I call them traitors instead?
Re: Re: Re:2
And you’re using it at least once every day, even on stories where there is no connection to China or Chinese interests. If you were trying to avoid sounding racist, you failed.
Re: Re: Re:2
No, you’re using it as a slur. Do you seriously think Stephen is a Chinese disinfo agent?
Re: Re: Re:3
No, I’m referring to the idiot who thinks Matt Drudge’s “news site” is a good source of news the disinfo agent. Or the hedge fund subsidaries.
But if you insist, I will attempt to police my language, considering the obvious Xi bootlickers are not around to harass Mike.
Re: Re: Re:4
Just be a bit more nuanced, is all.
Re: Re: Re:4
To my knowledge, we only have one semi-regular uses-a-name poster who would fit that description (“Valis”, I think they’re called). Every time you accuse someone else of being a “Xi bootlicker”, you do so without any proof beyond their contrarianism—and any dipshit troll from anywhere can be a contrarian. Your use of “wumao” comes off not as an attempt to call out conflict peddlers and disinformation agents working for the Chinese government, but as a way to slur Chinese people as a whole under the guise of calling out nationalist trolls. And while I can’t speak for everyone (including Techdirt’s owners/operators), I would certainly appreciate you not using “wumao” as a regular insult towards any of the usual trolls regardless of whether you believe they’re an agent of the Chinese government.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Not A Shock
Jon Stewart is a flame-thrower with an enormous ego. I am surprised that Apple had agreed to give him a platform. Controversy is not their normal stock-in-trade so they either did not know what they were getting (hard to believe), or they thought he would change his stripes.(also hard to believe)
Re:
“Jon Stewart is a flame-thrower with an enormous ego.”
What a silly metaphor.
You obviously do not like what he has to say, but I do not see any realistic criticisms.
Controversy? Oh Noes!
Why would/should he ‘change his stripes’ as you say?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re: Re: Take a hike
Don’t you have something better to do, like cleaning your cat liter box?
Re: Re: Re:
A liter isn’t big enough to fit a cat. Kitten, maybe.
Re: Re: Re:2
You underestimate the average cat.
Re: Re: Re:3
Excellent point, my bad.
I could maybe understand Apple and China: with so much of its critical manufacturing of products sitting in China, criticism of the thin skinned nation could cause real damage. (And whose fault is that? Hmm…)
But AI?
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Re:
Interferes with plans to replace all Apple employees with ChatGPT.
All Corporations Are Evil
If you think a corporation or brand has some kind of moral high ground, it is only a matter of time before you are disabused of that notion.
Re:
Viacom actually treated him well enough such that he had editorial control to actually criticize Viacom on air and Viacom backed off.
Apple, on the other hand…
Only reason I can think of...
The only reason I can think of for Apple to take this approach was because their mouth is glued to the bung-hole of the Chinese government (where the iPhones come out?). If anyone is likely to overreact to criticism, it’s either the CCP or Donald Trump, and I don’t think Apple has a lot of business with Florida Man.
Re:
You know, corporations do things for their own reasons, and frequently get governments and government-adjacent-wannabes to do stuff for them.
The only reason they ever appease the communist party of china or anyone else is market access.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Freedom of speech – not freedom from consequences. Good for Apple for defending their position and not letting Stewart exploit them to push his petty pet positions via their huge and lovely platform.
Re:
Thank you comrade, 0.5 yuan have been deposited in your account.
Re:
Why do you think they gave him their platform in the first place, if not to push his position on various topics, dingus?
Re: Re:
To make them money in a way that didn’t offend Stewart’s betters.
Re:
Whoosh!
Think different.*
*This phrase does not include issues such as artificial intelligence, China, the right to repair movement, DMCA § 1201, jailbreaking, hackintoshing, or any other view that does not align with the views of Apple, Inc, truth in journalism standards notwithstanding. And no, this does not make our 1984 ads ironic or make Steve Jobs roll in his grave; we have only welcomed change in the world if it is a change that will benefit us as a corporation.
Re:
I think it’s mostly about adverbs.
Apple is mainly a tech and hardware company. Any steps in a news/entertainment direction are heading away from their core business (and competencies).
In their core business, that kind of bullying usually works. For the foreseeable future those core business interests will keep totally overshadowing — and hindering — any expansion plans outside their core business.
it was said
what is that word?
INTEGRITY?
Long ago there was an award created based on 1 persons integrity.
Edward R. Murrow award
I looked this up a few years back, and it seemed that Every channel and agency HAD ONE.
And it looked as if all you needed was to donate money to the Company handing them out.
the only news I really watch is weather.90% of the rest is buried in BS and un-needed commentary.
Finding NEWS/information Im willing to listen to, and wonder about, and THINK about, isnt that easy. trying to change MINDS isnt easy anymore as you have to contend with TONS of BS rolling down hill.
'Either get him in line or get rid of him.'
Well someone in China cracked the whip…
Well, I guess Jon Stewart can now run for Speaker of the House. He’d sure bring the viewers for CSPAN
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Ironic Apple 1984?
Apple literally had its original Macintosh commercial, as a rendition of a scene from the book 1984, about how they were going to going to be preventing 1984 (the book).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ugxGvg0KCxI
Sad
I’m sad and angry to see “The Problem” being canceled. The podcasts were really informative.
Jon Stewart was less his “Daily Show” persona and more like a Howard Beale or Will McAvoy but in real life. He took on a much more serious tone with his subjects.
And…?
He can take his show elsewhere. It’s only localised censorship. Of all the stations and streaming choices, this is only one.
Re:
Whoosh!
Re: Re:
I thought it was ok for entertainment companies to toss people they don’t like?
Free speech. Private company. Whoosh my arse. There’s nothing notable here. Nothing different from republicans being tossed.
Apple didn’t want to keep him. That’s life.
So, an Autism $peaks supporter walks away from his current platform. Excuse me while I go shed some crocodile tears.