.png "back to home page")
Apple-FB drama always a fun read.
— Jason Kint (@jason_kint) August 12, 2022
But facts can be simplified:
- FB biz model is 98% surveillance advertising
- Most users don’t want to be tracked
- Apple kneecapped Facebook spring 2021
- This chart is an insane illustration of how boosted privacy shifts welfare
👏🏽 👏🏽 👏🏽 https://t.co/wCJMitWkCY pic.twitter.com/HhyjvIT9x8
This is completely bonkers. Like, absolutely. https://t.co/z8Wz0SvyeO
— ST (∞, ∞) (@seyitaylor) August 12, 2022
LMAO. Apple said the ads were in-app purchases, and they wanted to take their 30%.
— ST (∞, ∞) (@seyitaylor) August 12, 2022
Imagine Apple saying “oh yeah, you’re paying us an extra 30% to promote your new recipe app” lmao https://t.co/chp9p4JpFc pic.twitter.com/4ffyKVgHhE
Before Tim Cook put a pillow on Facebook's data collection machine, Apple proposed the companies "build businesses together."@sal19 has the details on the proposal of a subscription version of Facebook w/o ads from which Apple would take a 30% cut. https://t.co/TIRtaqt3uF
— Tripp Mickle (@trippmickle) August 12, 2022
It seems the privacy stance from Apple with Facebook was more motivated by business than values. https://t.co/aJRJn6EvcV
— Tariq KRIM (@tariqkrim) August 12, 2022
Apple has always cast its fight with Facebook in moral terms, with Apple execs looking down on the social network's biz model and privacy record.
— Nick Statt (@nickstatt) August 12, 2022
But this sounds very much like a "Nice social network you have there... would be unfortunate if something happened to it" approach. pic.twitter.com/b0I19HHD5W
Tim Cook: A data-harvesting ad business like Facebook's or Google's "degrades our fundamental right."
— Shira Ovide (@ShiraOvide) August 12, 2022
Also Apple:
*Takes $ billions a year so Google can apply its data ad business to Apple users;
*Proposed a partnership to collect a cut of FB revenue. https://t.co/mX0o6g0fZX
“You’ve got a nice social network here. It would be a shame if something happened to it…” https://t.co/lqHcNhMGR3
— M.G. Siegler (@mgsiegler) August 12, 2022
Wall Street Journal (@wsj @sal19) scoop on pre-#ATT #Apple-#Facebook talks vindicates publishers' class action in Northern California, German #antitrust investigation: #Facebook comes across as Evil Empire's victim https://t.co/3lOnJpaixB @Kartellamt @ClassActionLaw @geste #Meta
— Florian Mueller (@FOSSpatents) August 12, 2022
SCOOP: In the years before iOS 14.5, Apple and Facebook held several meetings discussing possible arrangements that would have earned the iPhone maker a slice of the social media company’s revenue, including an ad-free, subscription version of Facebook https://t.co/Uy3WWUJrRq
— Sal Rodriguez 🕷 (@sal19) August 12, 2022
When Apple talks about Privacy, read "power".
— Alex Russell (@slightlylate) August 12, 2022
Power Apple wields (often with good outcomes for users) because Apple is convinced that what it does is good because Apple did it.
The lack of any other principle behind this exercise of power is everywhere, if you look.
SCOOP from @sal19: years before ATT, Apple suggested ways that it could take a cut of Facebook's ad revenue, including a paid version of Facebookhttps://t.co/xfFBxNx5H7
— Patience 🧐 (@patiencehaggin) August 12, 2022
Wall St. Journal using football uni illo for article about Apple vs. Facebook. https://t.co/YhCrOO9ASh
— Paul Lukas (@UniWatch) August 12, 2022
So Apple was perfectly fine with profiting off Facebook's anti-privacy business model, and only when Facebook declined did Apple go on its holier-than-thou privacy crusade against Facebook's ads business.
— Thom Holwerda (@thomholwerda) August 12, 2022
Scum company with scum employees. https://t.co/wOD11lSATB
Crazy scoop from @sal19: Facebook and Apple at one point discussed the possibility of a paid, ad-free version of Facebook. Obviously it was doomed to fail—the two sides couldn't even agree on the definition of "ad"! https://t.co/Fk1ideJOT5
— Ethan Smith (@ethanwsj) August 12, 2022
Wow. @sal19 with tons of wild details in this story about how Apple's relationship with Meta deteriorated as Apple tried to extract more revenue from Facebook.
— Nick Statt (@nickstatt) August 12, 2022
Apple floated an ad-free FB while also suggesting it could enforce its 30% cut on paid posts. https://t.co/TfXzlmTb0E pic.twitter.com/SHo33qiJmO
Receipts.
— Alex Russell (@slightlylate) August 12, 2022
Apple is as vindictive as it is opportunistic, so this is brave of Matt. https://t.co/KHpE7MdWJb
Apple’s primary “privacy problem” is that they get 30% of the revenue of the apps on the right and 0% of the apps on the left.
— Dare Obasanjo (@Carnage4Life) August 12, 2022
Destroying the existing ads business model of free iOS apps then driving advertisers to use App Store & Apple News ads instead solves that problem nicely https://t.co/Wslfiqsvcl pic.twitter.com/nikcK6Gmef
Always remember that Apple's privacy provocation is not principled. If it were, it would set policies about terms of post-collection use for apps in its store. It would have banned FB's In-App "Browser" shenanigans. It would have removed *dozens* of permissions from native apps. https://t.co/MCTlZLbduJ
— Alex Russell (@slightlylate) August 12, 2022
There must be so much desire to get out from under Apple. Once alternate channels appear, there's going to be an explosive escape.
— Paul Graham (@paulg) August 12, 2022
Apple and FB discussed an ad-free, subscription-based version of FB as part of negotiations to "build businesses together." Now they are at war.
— Brad Reagan (@ReaganBrad) August 12, 2022
Great stuff behind the scenes of this momentous feud, from @sal19 https://t.co/SBUQltdK7b via @WSJ
FWIW, @automattic's boosted post feature on @tumblr (called Blaze), which is in spirit like Facebook's, was rejected until we implemented it as IAP and gave the 30% cut. https://t.co/RnepBh4Mq2
— Matt Mullenweg (@photomatt) August 12, 2022
You don't have to like ads (god knows I don't) or surveillance capitalism ([ unprintable diatribe ]) to understand that Apple is complicit and opportunistic.
— Alex Russell (@slightlylate) August 12, 2022
See also:https://t.co/Pir3DdIM5D
Wow: Among other potential concessions, Apple proposed that “post boosts” be considered as IAPs so that a 30% cut could be collected on the revenue they generated. ATT was introduced after no such revenue sharing compromise with FB was reached. https://t.co/HpXk1ENjT7
— Eric Seufert (@eric_seufert) August 12, 2022