Users accept the app store EULA, which serves as a contract, and in which Apple states it can shut down content according to any standards they desire. That means users are fine with Apple removing podcast apps that talk about whatever Apple doesn't like. If you believe otherwise, you believe that users don't understand the nature of contracts and can't decide on what's better for themselves.
On the other hand, are you saying that because of your ideas on how the world should run that contract is invalid and that Apple should be forced to change it retroactively, despite the fact they are not causing harm to anyone?
China invading Hong Kong is an aggression, for sure, but so is the EU interference in the free market and private contracts under whatever justification.
EULAs are not legally enforceable, nor are they legally binding. Clickthrough EULAs are absolutely contracts that users neither understand nor deign to read, and to claim otherwise is to hide behind the threat of the government monopoly on force imposed by legal action.
On the other hand, are you saying that because of your ideas on how the world should run that contract is invalid and that Apple should be forced to change it retroactively, despite the fact they are not causing harm to anyone?
China invading Hong Kong is an aggression, for sure, but so is the EU interference in the free market and private contracts under whatever justification.