A CNet article started making the rounds on Thursday, and it ties together some of the facets of my last two featured articles – profanity and eBooks. As many iPhone owners are perhaps aware, there are a handful of eBook readers available for the device, most of which are available through the App store.

David Conroy, a journalist for CNet and novelist, recently submitted his book “Knife Music” to the App Store only to have the application rejected based on “objectionable content”. In his case, that content was the age-old “F” bomb. This would appear to be a case of “censorship that was”. For Conroy, the decision was simple, he simply altered the profanity.

This would seem to set a dangerous precedent for the iPhone as an eBook device. Apple, after all, is perfectly fine with selling uncensored music and movies. The move to censor books, or those that are created as their own standalone application (as Conroy’s was), shows that sense of control that Apple is so well known for. The danger is that the iPhone is such an ideal reader, that if this trend continues, it could stymie that potential.

This weekend also saw the a case of censorship that wasn’t. Jenny Rae Rappaport, the owner of the Rappaport Agency and blogger behind Lit Soup, recently put up a post criticizing an article at Book Central for being sexist. The article in question, dealt with the most “attractive” women on the covers of Science Fiction and Fantasy books. Of course, the case of censorship that wasn’t didn’t start until the article was actually pulled. At this time, Jenny was accused for censoring the post. One commenter on Jenny’s blog went as far as to claim that she “actively campaign[ed] for an article of relevance to be withdrawn” .

And then came the First Amendment Stands, which are wholly out as I’m sure you know.
How do these two cases differ? And is either of them actually wrong? Why don’t you tell me.