Earlier quoted context omitted.
Rory asked an intentionally loaded and HuffPo-like question; "Can I move on to the problems you've had in terms of security...and your various arguments you've had with the Indian government and a number of governments in the Middle East" This is like asking Craigslist about their "issues with revenue" since it's free to post anything outside of jobs, and being free is one of the key features that defines Craigslist.…
I don't understand your analogy: in the Craigslist case Craigslist has no issues being free, but others have issues with it being free. Craiglist is not making changes to their free model to appease others. In the RIM case the system is secure except when they are giving access to the system to governments - making it not secure (at least in many people's eyes). How are these similar?
My point was that the BBC reporter was trying to create an issue out of something that is a core principle of the company (and something they do well in fact) and is intentionally misleading. I was trying to show the ridiculousness of it and help justify why the CEO got flustered and ended the interview.
So RIM is secure, the CEO is proud of it, and the question inferred that they're not secure.
Craigslist is free, the CEO is (probably) proud of it, and a question that infers that they have a problem because they don't charge for listings would be similar.