When reporting on App Store rejections, how much responsibility should tech journalists bear for independently verifying a developer's claims?
The Asterly Retraction: Accountability in Tech Journalism
In a significant retraction, John Gruber of Daring Fireball has corrected a previous report concerning an App Store rejection of the app 'Asterly.' Originally, Gruber reported that the app, related to the 'Dark Hours' astronomy website, was unfairly rejected by Apple on the grounds of being an astrology app. However, after further investigation and a correction from developer Terry Godier, it was revealed that the initial submission of 'Asterly' did indeed contain astrology-related features, including a 'Tarot card of the day.' This revelation prompted Gruber to retract his original stance, admitting he was misled by the developer's claims. This incident highlights the complex challenges tech journalists face when reporting on the App Store's opaque review process. It raises questions about the duty of journalists to independently verify the contents of submitted software builds versus relying on the word of developers, especially when those developers have a vested interest in disputing Apple's 'judgment' over 'standards.' The controversy serves as a case study in the difficulty of distinguishing between science and astrology within App Store guidelines.
Options
- Journalists must independently verify app builds to ensure accuracy.
- Journalists should rely on developer statements unless there is blatant evidence of error.
- The primary burden of truth and transparency lies with the developer's disclosures.
- The App Store's opaque nature makes independent verification nearly impossible for journalists.