If you do not know Unjected, the first thing is to tell you a little about this controversial app, although it is most likely that only with its name you have already quickly reached a first conclusion, which is confirmed by reading its description: «Connect businesses, find friendships or love in your unvaccinated community«. That is, we talk about a meeting point for people who, for one reason or another, have decided not to get vaccinated against the coronavirus.
It is not the first time that Unjected collides with the conditions of an application store and, consequently, you risk being eliminated from it. Previously, when in addition to the contact functions it also had a denialist bulletin board, Google required those responsible for Unjected to remove that section from the app or it would be removed from the market. Those responsible eliminated it but as far as we can read on Bloomberg They have been thinking about recovering it for a while, hoping that Google does not detect the change.
In Cupertino they have also decided to act against this app and, consequently, Unjected has been removed from the iOS App Store for, according to Apple, violating the policies defined by the company in relation to COVID-19. Many technology companies have established explicit policies to not allow the dissemination of false information that can be used to influence public opinion by sowing unreasonable doubts regarding the coronavirus and vaccines.
At this point it is important to develop a nuance in this regard, and that is that we are talking about unreasonable doubts. Because, obviously, it is not the same to have doubts about the effects of the vaccine in the medium or long term, or to be a little dizzy before so much change in criteria regarding which vaccines are used, risks according to population groups and others, that theories about microchips, 5G, the new world order, Bill Gates and George Soros or, worse still, supposedly scientific theories that, in reality, are nothing more than fallacious gibberish wrapped in scientific terminology identifiable but not interpretable by most.
Unjected hit app stores in May, in part as a response to the collaboration signed between the US federal administration and the main Internet dating services, by virtue of which they encourage their users to get vaccinated, and also improve the visibility of those profiles that have already been vaccinatedIn addition to distinguishing them with a specific badge, which makes it easier to find people who have already taken this step.
The problem with Unjected, according to Apple, is that spread false information and, in addition, those responsible have encouraged users to avoid terms such as “vaccine”, “injected” and “microchip”, to avoid that they are detected by the company’s reviewers, something that also goes against the terms that developers accept when uploading their apps to the Apple app store for iOS and its variants.
The big question, right now, is how Apple will act if those responsible for Unjected delete this type of information and they limit the app to a meeting point between people who reject the coronavirus vaccine. It is true that providing a meeting point for the most conspiratorial branch of the anti-vaccine does not seem particularly healthy.
However, on the other hand, Unjected it does nothing more than what many other online services do, these in the form of forums, message boards or closed communities. Just as surely there is some community of users who think that the seat belt is the result of a conspiracy of the Illuminati or that the Aserejé is, in reality, a ritual to invoke the evil one, make the antipope arrive and the world is plunged in 10,000 years of darkness. Ah! And that man never reached the Moon.
Apple’s reasons for removing Unjected seem appropriate to me, as does Google’s notice to remove the news wall that the Bilderberg Club wants to control our minds with vaccine microchips. Denialism, not the critical spirit, it is a problem for public health. Now, should Apple maintain the ban if those responsible for Unjected comply with all the necessary measures to adapt to the rules of the app store?
This is undoubtedly the most difficult question to answer. Unjected, in the end, would act as a meeting point for anti-vaccines, and the biggest problem I can see in this is that they give each other feedback, that they can arrange community meetings (of course, in places that also identify themselves as anti-vaccines) , and so on. In the end it’s nothing but self-imposed segregation which, yes, reinforces the feeling of belonging to a group, but on the other hand it allows them to refine the shot in their interpersonal relationships.
And it is that, after having seen in social networks images of profiles of services such as Tinder in which it is indicated that vaccinated people will be discarded, I almost find it healthier to avoid all interactions that can generate these publications, establishing a space like Unjected in which, as the saying goes, God creates them and they come together.
What do you think? Do you think that Unjected should be left out of the app stores permanently or, on the contrary, should it be allowed to return as a contact service between deniers?