Chris over at Ruminate offers a closely-reasoned assessment of the iTunes U issues. At a couple of points, though, I’m just not following the logic. Rather than leave yet another comment, here’s a response:

Chris,

You don’t see Apple posing as anything. I do. That’s where we differ. The difference matters, to me anyway, because Apple is using a vocabulary of liberation and altruism that’s modeled on the vocabulary the academy itself uses to define its mission. Looked at one way, that’s smart marketing. Looked at another way, it’s galling, and a lie. I don’t mind being offered a chance to buy something. I do mind being told I’m being set free in the process. To my mind, Apple’s rhetoric neatly matches Virginia Slims’ attempt to cash in on the discourse of women’s liberation in the late 60’s and early 70’s.

I’m obviously not being clear about what I mean by “ads.” What I mean is that iTunes is always already a music store, not just a content management system. The “ad” is on the menu on the left hand side of the window. And I imagine we’ll see more blatant ads placed directly on the page in the near future. Yes, many services are supported by ads. My point is that the principal content delivery media in education are not, and should not be. The analogy would be billboards in classrooms and sponsors’ commercials shown before and after every guest speaker, every concert, every public forum. I think that academic content, as much as possible, should not be accompanied by, or wrapped in, the noise and distraction of sales pitches. Like churches, schools should offer sanctuary for some thoughtful time outside the cries of the merchants to “come buy! come buy!”

I think the iPod is a wonderful device. I chose it for lots of compelling reasons. That’s why I don’t think Apple has to pursue this strategy of enticing institutions into iTunes U. Let the marketplace decide. Don’t force the issue by trying to craft a single-source environment–and yet that’s exactly what I think they’re trying to do.

UPDATE: Over at Ruminate, Chris responds to this post and offers a thought-experiment-challenge, one that strikes me as entirely fair and in fact helps sharpen my thinking a little more about what’s bothering me about iTunes U. Chris and I will probably never agree on the damage caused by Apple’s robes-of-righteousness marketing approach, but even with that out of the picture there are still useful points to discuss. I’ve taken up Chris’s challenge in a comment on his post. You can see the response for awhile on the cocomment feed on the top of the sidebar (right), at least until more comments take it off the sidebar.