‘Crooked’: Douglas Murray exposes Apple News for excluding right-leaning media

Key Concepts

• Big Tech Bias: The tendency of large technology companies to exhibit political leaning in their algorithms and content curation.
• Algorithm Manipulation: The use of algorithms to prioritize or suppress certain types of content, potentially influencing user perception.
• Reliability Ranking: A system used by platforms like Apple News to assess the trustworthiness of news sources, potentially leading to biased content delivery.
• Election Interference: Actions taken to influence the outcome of an election, including through media manipulation.
• Epstein Files: Documents related to Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking ring, revealing connections to prominent figures like Prince Andrew.
• Royal Family Contagion: The risk of scandal involving one member of the Royal Family damaging the reputation of the entire institution.

Apple News and Media Bias

The discussion begins with a critique of Apple News, specifically its alleged left-leaning bias in content curation. In January, Apple News featured 620 stories from left-leaning news sources and zero from right-leaning sources. This disparity raises concerns about potential election interference, as Apple’s algorithm effectively controls the news feed of a significant portion of its user base.

Douglas Murray explains that Apple justifies this imbalance through a “reliability ranking” system, where left-wing publications are deemed more trustworthy than conservative ones. He draws a parallel to the pre-Elon Musk Twitter, where similar concerns about algorithmic manipulation and “silence and mute buttons” existed. Murray argues this practice is “crooked,” “unfair,” and “unbalanced,” suggesting that if tech companies fail to address this issue, the US Congress should intervene. He emphasizes the power of Apple as a medium, noting how many people rely on their phones for news consumption.

Prince Andrew and the Epstein Scandal

The conversation then shifts to the legal troubles of Prince Andrew, who was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office following revelations from the Epstein files. Police are searching properties linked to him, and the British government has pledged to release more files related to his 2001 appointment as a UK trade envoy.

The discussion centers on whether this crisis is limited to Prince Andrew or extends to the broader Royal Family and their public standing, which has already declined since the Queen’s death. Murray believes the Royal Family has managed the situation relatively well by distancing themselves from Andrew. He notes the King’s statement on Andrew’s arrest deliberately avoided referring to him as “my brother,” demonstrating a calculated attempt to avoid “contagion.”

However, Murray also suggests that a little “human expression” in the King’s statement might have been appropriate. He highlights the extraordinary impact of the ongoing Epstein story, particularly in the UK, where it has led to scrutiny of Prince Andrew’s past role and prompted the current government (under Rishi Sunak, referred to as “Karma’s government”) to investigate the processes behind his appointment as a trade envoy. This investigation is proving a distraction for Sunak as he attempts to launch his own initiatives.

Logical Connections and Synthesis

The two segments, while seemingly disparate, are connected by a common thread: the abuse of power and the manipulation of information. In the case of Apple News, the power lies in algorithmic control over information access. In the case of Prince Andrew, the power lies in historical privilege and the potential for cover-ups. Both scenarios demonstrate how institutions can prioritize self-preservation over transparency and fairness.

The main takeaway is the need for greater scrutiny of both big tech companies and powerful institutions. The Apple News example underscores the importance of algorithmic accountability and the potential for subtle yet significant forms of election interference. The Prince Andrew case highlights the enduring consequences of past actions and the challenges of maintaining public trust in established institutions. Both segments emphasize the importance of independent investigation and a commitment to transparency.