Does Apple Hate Christians?
Many of you may be aware of the recent story regarding the Apple App Store and the Manhattan Declaration. If you are not aware of the details, the basic summary is that Apple, after first approving it, banned an “app” from its “app store” that promoted a document called the Manhattan Declaration. This document, among other things, supports a traditional view of marriage and the sanctity of life. The goal of the app was to get its users to support the declaration by signing it online. To date, over 480,000 people have signed the document. The app was pulled after a petition generated by change.org was sent to Apple, which now has over 7700 signatures.
It wasn’t that long ago that many Christians were applauding Steve Jobs and Apple for their stance against pornography. We liked it when they played moral judge. So what happened? Well, it turns out that Apple’s policies for the App Store not only prohibit pornography, but also prohibit anything that Apple considers “defamatory, offensive, or mean-spirited”. A former student of mine, who currently works at Apple, provided me with some insight:
I think enough people raised a stink about the specific reference to LGBT people as sexually immoral that they played it up as being defamatory and too targeted against one cultural group (this is the key — see below: 19.1). I think that the moderators try to weed out controversy so as to mellow out the store, but probably only analyze apps where enough complaints are received. The text in question was most likely a hard-coded part of the app itself rather than dynamic content. I think this is a one-off situation on a controversial topic within the app store, and am entirely confident that the “what if” scenarios on [Phil Vischer's] blog would never happen. It will be interesting to see what happens next.
This student went on to point out some of the specific policies that could apply to this app:
19.1: “Apps containing references or commentary about a religious, cultural or ethnic group that are defamatory, offensive, mean-spirited or likely to expose the targeted group to harm or violence will be rejected.”19.2: “Apps may contain or quote religious text provided the quotes or translations are accurate and not misleading. Commentary should be educational or informative rather than inflammatory.”
If you read the Manhattan Declaration, it specifically calls out homosexuality and same-sex marriage as “immoral”. In Apple’s interpretation, this specifically violate guideline 19.1, in that it makes a reference to a cultural group that is offensive. Apple went public with their opposition to Prop. 8 in California and has a 100% rating from the Human Rights Campaign’s Corporate Equality Index, so this reaction is not surprising at all.
The real question is: now what? Boycott Apple? Ignore it because we like their products? Here are some thoughts I am considering:
- Apple has every right to determine what is sold in their store. This is not censorship; they are a private company. It is also our right to choose not to buy their products or use their services.
- The App Store is one of the primary ways that the Bible itself is being distributed. As my former student commented to me, ”Keep in mind that one of the most popular apps is the free (YouVersion) Bible, which allows you to download ‘contribs’ like commentaries which clearly offend some people yet are very informative and even academic.”
- Any Christian organization looking to develop an “app” for the iOS market should be aware of the policies that Apple has in place. Apple clearly does not want apps that are controversial in their store.
- Apple’s banning of this app has created quite a bit of publicity for the Manhattan Declaration. How many of you had heard of it before you read this post?
So, to answer the original question: no, I don’t think Apple hates Christians. They are doing what they think is right, but we know where that leads. For me, I am going to take a wait-and-see attitude on this. Apple has earned quite a bit of goodwill with me and I want to see how this plays out. I will definitely be watching them more closely as new apps (and app stores) roll out.
What is your reaction to this story? Leave a comment to give me your thoughts. You can keep up with the latest developments on the Manhattan Declaration’s blog.
Living in a post-web site world
Whenever someone comes up to me requesting help for their church or ministry’s Internet effort, I usually get asked a question such as: “How can we make our website better?” In my opinion, this is the wrong question to ask. We are now living in a “post-website” world. I don’t know when this happened, but over the past year or so, there has been a shift away from the organization website being the centerpiece of the online world. We need to go where the people are; they are not going to come to us. The advent of social media, including the massive popularity and mainstreaming of Facebook, has changed the game. The question should now be: “What should our online strategy be?”
This is not to say that you don’t need a web site. A web site is your stake in the ground, it is how people will find information about you if they are looking for it. But it is not going to be your primary means of interaction. Sure, you can build your own social network or your own photo-sharing site, but what is going to draw people to it? They are already on Facebook! They are already on Twitter, YouTube, Buzz, MySpace, LinkedIn, and many others! Do your research and find out where the people whom you want to reach are going and then go there yourself! Your strategy should include an intentional focus on specific social media sites based on your research.
So what does this look like? For many, it means Facebook, absolutely. For others, it means getting on board with mobile technologies. Looking forward (as you must do) it should include location-based technologies such as FourSquare or Yelp! And be sure you are getting on board with the augmented reality applications starting to appear! It can be overwhelming, but by making intentional choices, you can move forward in a strategic way that will bring success. If your ministry is struggling with strategic decisions regarding online ministry, consider working with someone like me who is keeping on top of these technologies and can provide strategic planning and advice.
So what do you think? Is the web site as the priority Internet presence a thing of the past? Can an organization get away with a minimal website if they focus on social media sites instead?
Gabe Lyons presentation
Tonight at the Internet Ministry Conference we heard from Gabe Lyons, the co-author of unChristian: What a New Generation Really Thinks about Christianity… and Why It Matters
In August, I was able to hear the other co-author of this book, Dave Kinnaman, present the same findings. His presentation was part of the Biola Faculty Retreat, and we as faculty were able to have some discussions afterwards as to how Biola might respond to the findings in the book. It was an interesting discussion, as several professors took issue with Dave’s call for us to re-think the way we present our Christianity so as to be more appealing to the “outsiders”.
In his presentation tonight, Gabe challenged us to be less judgmental, less sheltered and adopt an approach of “the common good”. We should work to develop relationships and not just post the equivalent of online gospel tracts. Many in the audiences seemed to take this to heart, while others were not so sure.
Most all of findings presented in the book were not news to me. Having recently completed a doctorate at a liberal university, I was accustomed to Christianity being looked at this way. The real issue is how we are going to respond. We cannot water down our message – we must be firm in our beliefs. However, the attitude we have when we present it and the relationships we build with those who do not have a firm faith, or no faith at all, are the keys to changing these perceptions.
What do you think?
MacNation is happening…
As many of you know, I switched to a Mac laptop last year – see this post for my reasons. Based on anecdotal evidence, I have gotten the impression over the past few months that the Mac was making inroads into the corporate world. An article on MSNBC today confirms these impressions.
If you are thinking about a new computer, think about a Mac. I have been using a Mac and living in Google mail, calendar, and documents for nine months now, and I don’t plan on switching back.
Are web sites obsolete?
As I have been working on a web site for my church, I have started to wonder if the whole idea of having an all-encompassing web site is becoming obsolete. It seems that all the effort going into designing, developing, and maintaining a web site is a tremendous amount of work that must be re-done every two or three years. And now, with the advent of XML, where the form and content have been separated (see this video for a good explanation of what I am talking about), it seems that we should instead separate content creation from web site design.
What I mean is this: for each type of content we want to make available, we should find the appropriate tool and use it. Then we should allow those who are consuming our content to view it in any way that they would like. For example, for a church calendar, use Google calendar (my personal favorite) to manage the calendar and then make it “public”, which allows someone to integrate it into their personal calendar, bring it in to their “home page” via an RSS reader, or just view it directly.
Or take another example: each ministry wants the ability to communicate with their members. A youth pastor could use a blog as a way to keep his youth group up to date on what is going on in the ministry, complete with photos (linked from Flickr) and videos (from YouTube). The members of his group could keep up to date by subscribing to the blog via email, importing it into their Facebook profile, or just viewing the blog directly.
OK, you say, this is all fine and good, but we still need a web site! Well, yes, you do need something that is a place with your basic information and a place to direct search engines, but it should really be an aggregation of all these other tools.
One key to successful web ministry is a distributed model of updating. By allowing each ministry to update their own information, you will get the most dynamic web site possible. But the challenge to this then becomes: how do you change the culture within your organization so that each ministry is willing to do this kind of updating?
So do you agree or disagree? Could a church (or other parachurch or nonprofit) have a successful web ministry without a full-fledged web site? Or am I going out of my mind?
Technology is not the problem
When I teach my class on the management of information systems here at Biola, the first thing I present to the students is the concept of an information system being much more than just computers. My students learn on the first day of class that the five components of an information system are hardware, software, data, people, and processes. And it is the people and processes where information systems have the biggest impact on an organization. As I study how the Internet is used for ministry, I am becoming convinced that this breakdown of an information system can be modified slightly and used as a model for the implementation of Internet ministry. For a ministry to successfully implement a web presence, they must deal with three key areas: technology, people, and processes. And again, as with information systems, it is the people and processes components that are the biggest impact.
You can find books, blogs, vendors, consultants, and volunteers to help with technology. In fact, it seems as if everyone I know has an idea or is a self-proclaimed expert at one sort of technology or the other. And technology changes so fast that there is no way to always be doing the best and greatest of everything. Of course, technology is very important and a lack of good technology will get you in trouble, but it is not the key factor to success of an Internet ministry.
I am working with our church to develop a new web presence (to be unveiled soon). The technology we are using is suitable to our environment and is a huge step forward from our existing web site. As we are getting closer and closer to being ready to go live, though, I am getting more and more concerned that the people and processes will not be ready to go. I am finding that implementing technology is a whole lot easier that changing people’s work habits. Because of this, I have delayed the “go live” date of our web site by a month so that we can have adequate time to be sure that the people at the church fully understand their role in keeping the web site current and the existing processes can be modified properly so that the web site becomes fully integrated into the day-to-day activities of the church.
I think one of the biggest mistakes a ministry can make is to focus solely on the technology and the features of their web site and forget about who they are: the people who work in the ministry and the different tasks performed by the ministry. Both of these must be taken into account before any technological solution can become successful.
Another perspective on Internet ministry
In my previous post, I summarized a discussion I had with several pastors in an all day session on Internet ministry. One of the points made by these pastors was that true ministry required physical presence: “the class agreed that effective Internet ministry should always encourage face-to-face fellowship and should never replace the physical gathering.” As a ministry develops an Internet presence, this philosophical point must be agreed upon beforehand. If you feel that your Internet ministry is a supplement to face-to-face ministry, then you will likely choose a different feature set for your web site than if you saw the Internet as the primary place for ministry.
I received this email from Brian Atkinson, Manager of Alliance Development for Gospel Communications Network, regarding his thoughts on the place of the Internet in ministry:
Hi David,
I read through your blog post, and I have some comments.
Our internet ministry is built on the notion that the internet can indeed be used for ministry. We value the face-to-face time and have an annual conference to facilitate the community better. But for us, the physical connection supplements the internet ministry and not the other-way around.
Time and time again, we’ve seen people touched – virtually – but nonetheless spiritually by internet ministry. We have a nearly 13 year track record of ministries with no physical component to their ministry make an enormous impact for Christ online; bringing people into relationship with Jesus and helping to develop that relationship. I’ve personally been involved in ministry over the internet for nearly 10 years. I’ve never met anyone I’ve counseled face-to-face and I don’t intend to. I believe that ministry can happen anywhere – even in cyberspace.
I hope that helps,
-brian
Where do you stand on this issue? Did your organization develop a philosophy on this before (or during) the development of your web presence?
Discussing Internet ministry with pastors
I had the privilege of spending all day with about twenty-five pastors last week to discuss the topic of Internet ministry. These men were all students in the Doctor of Ministry program at Talbot Theological Seminary, attending a two-week intensive course on site at Biola. Dr. Kent Edwards, the professor, offered me a day with them to discuss Internet ministry. It was a blessing for me to be able to share my insights on the Internet with them and also for them to discuss their insights on the Internet and ministry with me. After opening up with some background on the Internet and the evolution of the web (all the way up to that buzzword “web 2.0″), we switched gears and spent some time discussing two questions: “What is ministry?” and “How can the Internet be used for ministry?”.
What is ministry?
When I asked “What is ministry?”, the class immediately began tossing out responses. Most could be summarized by simply stating “love your neighbor as yourself”: serving others, meeting the needs of others, caring, helping others grow in grace, glorifying God. What became clear was that there was no single definition of ministry; one must look around them and see what is needed and then minister to the needs that arise. We also agreed that ministry is inherently physical: most of these things require, at some point, face to face contact.
How can the Internet be used for ministry?
The discussion then turned to the Internet. To do ministry on the Internet is straightfoward: take the answers to “what is ministry?” and do it on the Internet. We discussed several ways that this could be done, but we kept coming back to the idea of a physical presence being required at some point. We then agreed that some of the elements of ministry could be done online, but not all of them.
Three categories of Internet ministry
During our discussion, Dr. Edwards worked to help organize our thinking. He suggested that the use of the Internet for ministry could be divided into three categories:
- missions/outreach: using the Internet to reach the unreached, to spread the news about the gospel. For example: putting up a web page that shared the gospel to a targeted group and encourages them to attend your church or find a church body for themselves.
- augmenting existing ministry: leveraging the Internet to enhance current ministry tasks and to make them more efficient. For example: starting a prayer blog to better communicate both prayer requests and answers to prayer.
- replacing existing ministry: to completely move a ministry task to the Internet and not do it physically. For example: doing small groups online via Skype or IM.
The class agreed that the first two categories were definitely useful, but that the third category was problematic. In fact, as the discussion turned from “what is Internet ministry?” to “what is effective Internet ministry?”, the class agreed that effective Internet ministry should always encourage face-to-face fellowship and should never replace the physical gathering.
I responded to the class that not everyone would agree with them. I know several churches who are willing to do some of the third category of ministry, with the idea that it is the only way to reach some people.
What do you think? Is it a good use of the Internet to completely replace some aspects of physical ministry with online ministry? Are we being presumptuous in assuming that one can fully fellowship with other believers online? Or should there always be the intention to bring them to a physical church body? In future blog posts, I will explore this further and look at a couple of examples of how some churches are handling Internet ministry in that third category.
Technology use by the Amish
I just came across this very interesting article on how the Amish use technology, written for Wired by Howard Rheingold. Howard is hard to describe: academic, visionary, artisan, eccentric. He loves technology and and examines it from unorthodox angles. This particular article falls into the topic I have been thinking about lately: the effects of technology on our faith and relationships. In it, he explores exactly how the Amish determine which technology they will allow into their communities and which they will not. While we all think that the Amish never use any technology, in fact they do. But they do not want to be controlled by it or allow it to change who they are – a quite healthy point of view that maybe we could use as well. As the article explains:
While the say of the bishops is binding, the Amish come to their decisions quite consensually. New things are not outright forbidden, nor is there a rush to judgment. Rather, technologies filter in when one of the more daring members of the community starts to use, or even purchases, something new. Then others try it. Then reports circulate about the results. What happens with daily use? Does it bring people together? Or have the opposite effect?
Read the article and let me know your thoughts. What criteria should we use when adopting a technology for our personal use? Do you know anyone who has refused to own a cellphone or own a television for this reason?
Using Technology to Improve Your Life
Recently, I questioned whether technology was really morally neutral. For much of my life I have seen technology as a tool for progress, for improvement. In fact, I am focusing much of my time right now into research on how technology can be used to improve the ministries of churches and missions organizations. I am generally an optimist when it comes to technology and think that it generally has a positive influence on society, so it was somewhat of a revelation for me to consider that technology is not morally neutral, but may in fact be morally negative.
So lately I have been thinking about the technology I use day to day in my life and wondering what sorts of effects it is having on me. More specifically, how is it affecting the things that I value most highly: my faith and my family. Is it improving or detracting from my day to day relationships with my God and those I most love?
In this post, I want to focus on a positive impact that a specific technology is having on my relationships. Specifically, I want to focus on my High Definition Dual Digital Video Recorder Satellite Dish Box. So, what is the positive impact that this is having on my relationships? Besides allowing me to watch my beloved Lakers and Angels in glorious high definition in surround sound (not to mention “24”, if it ever returns to the small screen this year!), it also allows me to decide when I want to watch.
You see, it is not the high definition or the Dolby 5.1 surround that improves my relationships. It is the DVR. I can now be intentional about what television I watch. There are two specific uses for this that have greatly improved my relationships, specifically with my family. First, I can time shift. This time of year, I love to keep up with the Lakers, college bowl games, and the NFL playoffs. But the rest of my family does not. So I can now record the games during the evening and watch them after everyone has gone to bed. The dual receiver function of our box also comes into play here: I can record the game on one receiver while we watch something else on the other.
The second way the DVR improves my relationships is that we, as a family, can select the shows we want to watch ahead of time and then sit down when we have time and watch them (and skip the commercials as well). It allows us to be highly selective of our time in front of the television and it gives us the chance to decide based upon what we are interested in, not based upon what’s on right now.
So, here’s a thumbs up to technology, at least this time. As I come up with other uses where technology has an impact on my family or my faith, I will post them here. What about you? Have you noticed technology’s impact on your family or your faith? Let me know in the comments.
Search
Welcome to the Lessons From Babel blog
This blog is where I share the latest thoughts on the world of technology and faith. Feel free to join the conversation by leaving a comment. To find out more about me, my company, and this web site, or to see what resources are available on this site, click on the images right below this.
- Dave Bourgeois
