Serious question: why is censorship of sexual content by Apple largely ignored, but it becomes a huge deal when other large companies do it?
While I disagree with Apple's stance, I think there's a valid argument that Apple is running a platform that you can choose to utilize or engage with or not - similar to how Apple could refuse to serve or trespass someone from one of their physical stores, the platform is self contained and clearly owned by a single entity.
The fundamental difference with a payment processor is that they control financial transactions between entities that have no relation to Visa/MC. They facilitate money being moved quickly and efficiently between accounts for goods or services, and they have no business inserting themselves into the content of the transaction.
I think it's also worth pointing out that the main reason I think that it's inappropriate for payment processors to decide on what content can be paid for with their systems is that it's a closed ecosystem - you can't just set up your own payment processor (though some governments are attempting to do so already), so there's a real risk of a small number of companies controlling what can and can't be bought digitally - that includes not just content related to sex, but also potentially content that is violent, or political.
If we're going to have a very limited group of payment processors, then they need to be completely neutral - or we need to make it possible (or at least easier) for alternative payment processors to spin up operations and work within the global financial network. Considering the technical and regulatory difficulty of that second option I think the former is the better path.
I do think it's a shame that Apple controls the App Store so tightly -- it's not just NSFW stuff that's banned, it's all kinds of stuff for all sorts of reasons, e.g.
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2012/aug/30/apple-blo...
If the web were invented today, it'd be strangled in the crib, since Apple would never approve the browser app.
It shouldn't be ignored, and perhaps Apple should revise this position in light of all the attacks already on the Apple app store. Except that perhaps instead this is actually earning them some points among some of these attackers, who knows?
I would say the reason is Apple app store was irrelevant initially - from a market share point of view. And they had this policy from the start. Now Apple is very relevant in market share and should change that policy to reflect that.
- being blamed for facilitating, and/or having to monitor for, illegal content like reverge porn and CSAM
- reputation damage from being associated with content they (and others) morally object to
- history of increased risk of chargebacks and fraud from adult sites
- adult actors have explicitly petitioned sites and processors to ban unverified content uploads, and they would rather ban everything than play police