Phil Schiller:
"Apple did not censor the content in this developer’s application and Apple did not reject this developer’s application for including references to common swear words."
Phil Crosby:
"They provided screenshots of the words 'shit' and 'fuck' showing up in our dictionary's search results."
I'm sorry, this is a strong suggestion that without these types of words, the app would be approved.
If you don't call that censorship, then call it "chilling effect", but the outcome is the same.
And the other thing that doesn't ring true is the following oddity.
Phil Schiller:
"...anyone can easily see that Apple has previously approved other dictionary applications in the App Store that include all of the 'swear' words..."
Then why did Apple reject the app for these swear words?
Phil Schiller: "Apple did not censor the content in this developer’s application and Apple did not reject this developer’s application for including references to common swear words."
Phil Crosby: "They provided screenshots of the words 'shit' and 'fuck' showing up in our dictionary's search results."
I'm sorry, this is a strong suggestion that without these types of words, the app would be approved.
If you don't call that censorship, then call it "chilling effect", but the outcome is the same.
And the other thing that doesn't ring true is the following oddity.
Phil Schiller: "...anyone can easily see that Apple has previously approved other dictionary applications in the App Store that include all of the 'swear' words..."
Then why did Apple reject the app for these swear words?
(And why is 'swear' in inverted commas?)
[edit: formatting]