These are two completely different businesses. Amazon is a marketplace that sells basically anything sold by anyone. Apple is a manufacturer who lists their own products or accessories for their own products.
When I walk into my local grocer, they offer better deals on the house brand and advertise as such. Why does Amazon need to push people toward someone else’s product? We don’t hold any other retailer I can think of to this standard.
Well in this case, the primary issue is around anti-trust and competition. Given that amazon has a bout a 50% share of e-commerce, this kind of behavior could be harmful to competition and well functioning markets. The counter argument is to say that their space is not e-commerce but all retail and thus Amazon is not a monopolist, but I would argue that this not a good precedent to set for a well functioning economy.
Most tech companies have avoided anti-trust by arguing that they don't hold monopoly power, but I think we are behind the game in terms of regulation. Again, I wouldn't have a problem with Amazon promoting their own products if it didn't have a strong effect on competition and how well markets operate, but I really believe that a lot of the placers are exhibiting monopolist behavior.
There's a difference between stocking your own products alongside the alternatives and marketing your own products to the exclusion of the alternatives.
If you're doing only one or the other, there's no problem. If you're doing both, there's a serious asymmetry and you are taking money from the alternatives' suppliers under false pretenses. The suppliers expect to be on equal footing with its competitors. At this stage, Amazon's products should be considered one supplier out of many and shouldn't be offered special treatment because it belongs to the retailer.
When you walk into your local grocer, they aren't putting all the house brand stuff in the front and hiding the name brand stuff in a stockroom where you need to specifically ask for it.
