ke apple | B Michael Tumblr

But billionaires don’t buy newspapers to run them as public goods, and smart billionaires don’t buy newspapers to make money. Billionaires buy newspapers for influence. That is the point. The Post is among the most influential in the nation. Second- or third-most, depending on which party is in power. Buying the Washington Post is sort of like retaining the best-connected lobbyist in Washington, in a parallel world in which lobbyists are universally praised for their value to functioning democracies. Bezos needn’t even exercise his influence in the vulgar fashion of a Murdoch. He can merely staff the paper with people attuned to his worldview and allow the opinion page to evolve to reflect his interests naturally. (And honestly, the interests of a rich “socially liberal” libertarian-leaning Democrat are already pretty well-reflected by the Washington Post editorial page.)

The very reasonable fear isn’t that Bezos will fire all the reporters — he’s a “long-term value” guy, not a cost-slashing Sam Zell — but that Bezos will use his newly bought influence to lobby for federal policies that align with his financial interests. He does not particularly want to pay taxes, and he’d strongly prefer it if his cheap labor remained cheap, which is to say non-union.

When newspapers are only owned by the rich they rarely argue for the interests of the poor. But we already reached that point years ago, and a Bezos is probably no worse than a Graham or Weymouth, in the scheme of things.

Pareene on the sale of the Washington Post. (via bricksandmortarandchewinggum)

Man this is crazy to think about. I’ve noticed within the latest news micro-cycle some shit about the US government being pro Apple because of some flim flam about interpreting patent specificity based on jurisdiction, which is whatever something. But the government is defiantly pro Amazon, and it’s terrifying to think of the nation going even more that way: a one publisher, one store, warehouse drone nation.

Apple Privilege - What is it?

I was out walking the dogs this morning, and I was listening to an, erm, popular Apple pundit talk with another Apple pundit on the former’s podcast when I was struck really struck by a clear and forceful idea, which I have no idea why I’m burying it so far down here. But it’s that — these two weren’t really saying anything unreasonable, but they seemed to be giving Apple a lot of latitude for certain weird (or at least arbitrary-seeming) decisions — and I was like, These guys would be tearing up Google or Amazon for this but they give Apple a total pass. Why? Like honestly, why?

And it’s really obvious, but it’s because they privilege Apple’s design and engineering decisions, and then, yes it struck:

The way that people (pundits, writers, technologists, TED talk types) seem to treat Apple almost exactly resembles the structure of privilege seen in or enjoyed by men and/or different racial majorities.

Ie, there exists something that I’d call “Apple privilege”.

Apple privilege is that their arbitrary design decisions are accepted on faith. Apple privilege is that its products “just work”. How do they work? Well, they work in narrowly prescribed ways that Apple intends, but that’s taken as the “right way” for things to “work”. (Apple’s UI is “natural” - and more troublingly, patentable, like the human genome.) Apple privilege is that there are innumerable and subtle ways that Apple’s “user experience” is obviously superior to non-Apple user experiences. Apple privilege is that Apple is the biggest company in the world, and it has achieved that distinction only through merit - rather than by taking advantage of tax loopholes, a monopoly on the raw materials needed (by it and every other tech company), a ruthless supply chain, and a strict reliance on the economic benefits of and economy of scale created by manufacturing its goods and components in a small part of China. (Apple privilege is also not wanting to talk about that in any reasonable way, or only talking about it by way of saying that “everyone does that”.) Apple privilege is that its very idea of computing just is computing now, and it’s affecting the whole world.

Apple has become the predominate tech company and the predominate late-capitalist American company by subliming consumer desire into a new form of privileging one conception of corporate experience.

Is that evil or bad or anything? Not exactly. But like any other type of privilege, it’s worth examining and certainly shouldn’t be ignored (as either trolling or hating or just ‘not getting it’). And there’s an even more delicious (if you like eating crap sandwiches, maybe) irony in that Apple pundits and writers have been, in my experience (probably because I don’t follow any other types of tech pundit, though) in my experience Apple pundits are some of the most regressive, sexist types. So other than the hardline Libertarian hacktivist types who would favor a Windows or Linux experience, Apple pundits and defenders have this pseudo-naturalized idea of meritocracy and excellence that we all know is not necessarily earned in a vacuum and certainly not worthy of praise.

This all is really just a spitballed idea I had ten minutes ago on a walk, but maybe there’s something to it.