Apple/other companies soft-ban on confederate flag in games?

[Zelig]

This is entirely consistent with Apple's general censorship policies, and far more mild than various other censorship rules they have.

Buy into a more open platform if you don't like it.

 

[Formaldehyde]

So, what else do they "censor"?

 

[Zelig]

So, what else do they "censor"?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Apple

Among others: "In December 2009, Apple banned a cartoon app called NewsToons by cartoonist Mark Fiore, on the grounds that it "ridiculed public figures." In April 2010, Fiore won the Pulitzer prize for his political satire cartoons, making history as the very first internet-only cartoonist to win the prestigious journalistic prize."

 

[Formaldehyde]

In other words, essentially nothing that wasn't due to not being properly labeled as being for adults only? Or in a few cases due to runaway political correctness which were later reversed, including that one?

 

[Zelig]

In other words, essentially nothing that wasn't due to not being properly labeled as being for adults only?

Only relevant to media, not apps.

 

[aelf]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_by_Apple

Among others: "In December 2009, Apple banned a cartoon app called NewsToons by cartoonist Mark Fiore, on the grounds that it "ridiculed public figures." In April 2010, Fiore won the Pulitzer prize for his political satire cartoons, making history as the very first internet-only cartoonist to win the prestigious journalistic prize."

Looking at that list, it seems Apple's bans also pander to right-wing sensibilities. Do we have a schizophrenic company, then? Or is Apple's policy simply not reducible to leftist pandering?

 

[GenMarshall]

This is quite an insane overreaction over the issue of the flag of the Confederacy. Next up well ban flags of Imperial Japan and the Soviet Union in historical videogames.

The last I checked, 'MURICA is not Germany in terms of censorship in videogames.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Only relevant to media, not apps.

You mean like this one?

In May 4 2015, Apple removed the France Musique application from its App store due to the airing of "inappropriate content" in a podcast.[28] The application displayed a painting by Édouard Manet, Olympia, depicting mild nudity. The podcast application was submitted to the App Store again, with a 17+ rating.[29]

There have been only a handful of apps which have been banned out of the hundreds, or perhaps thousands, which were created. And you could argue they were all in extremely bad taste or blatantly derogatory of Apple with the exception of the one you mentioned. And that decision was reversed.

Virtually all such companies "censor" what they find to be offensive, or available to children when they feel they should be restricted by age.

The only real difference is this particular matter. I don't know of any other software company that has banned Confederate flags from games, at least yet.

This is quite an insane overreaction over the issue of the flag of the Confederacy. Next up well ban flags of Imperial Japan and the Soviet Union in historical videogames.

The obvious difference is that their flags are not used as the favorite dog whistle of the white supremacists even today. Not to mention they are no longer even hostile towards the US government, unlike many racists in the South who continue to fight the Civil War even today.

 

[Commodore]

This is quite an insane overreaction over the issue of the flag of the Confederacy. Next up well ban flags of Imperial Japan and the Soviet Union in historical videogames.

The last I checked, 'MURICA is not Germany in terms of censorship in videogames.

1. This isn't government-mandated censorship, so the comparison to Germany's ban on Nazi symbols is not a valid comparison at all.

2. This isn't even censorship to begin with. Apple isn't demanding the developers of those games remove the Confederate flag from the game, they just stated that as long as that flag is in the game, they will not sell it through their app store. Censorship would be if Apple demanded the flag be removed from the game.

3. It's not like these games were wiped from existence, they just aren't available for Apple customers. If you are unhappy with Apple's decision, you are free to get rid of your Apple products and switch over to Android devices instead.

The main point, of course, being that no censorship whatsoever has taken place. All that happened was a business made a change to what products and services they wish to make available to their customers. People calling this censorship are just trying to sensationalize the story and are making a mountain out of a molehill.

 

[Zelig]

You mean like this one?

Seems to be new due to policy changes on Apple's part. Any app which provides unrestricted web access in the app can't be updated without being pushed to 17+.

There have been only a handful of apps which have been banned out of the hundreds, or perhaps thousands, which were created.

You're orders of magnitude too low. Of course lots of apps eventually get restored, since creators modify the apps to pass whatever arbitrary or unknown reasons Apple provides or more well-known apps kick up the media.

And you could argue they were all in extremely bad taste or blatantly derogatory of Apple with the exception of the one you mentioned.

You could argue the same thing about confederate flags. Or you could Google for any number of other examples:

http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com...ng-app-from-app-store-and-educators-complain/

[Apple] made some educators upset when it removed an app, Scratch Viewer, from the iTunes App Store.

Scratch Viewer was designed to let educators and others review a child’s work that was created on an iPad, iPhone or iPod Touch using the Scratch programming language, which has become popular in many schools.

Virtually all such companies "censor" what they find to be offensive, or available to children when they feel they should be restricted by age.

The only real difference is this particular matter. I don't know of any other software company that has banned Confederate flags from games, at least yet.

"All such companies" essentially includes Apple, Google and MS. Apple is more restrictive than the other two, and is famously difficult to deal with when restricting apps, as they typically don't give you any feedback about why they've rejected your app. In any case, by "more open platform" I'm suggesting not to use a walled garden from any of Apple/Google/MS if this kind of thing bothers you.

So what is even your point?

 

[Formaldehyde]

Seems to be new due to policy changes on Apple's part. Any app which provides unrestricted web access in the app can't be updated without being pushed to 17+.

Right. It had nothing at all to do with the "mild nudity" that some parent may have complained about for all we know. Nearly all these cases have much in common with each other. Once they were modified to be 17+ or require parental approval they were allowed.

You're orders of magnitude too low. Of course lots of apps eventually get restored, since creators modify the apps to pass whatever arbitrary or unknown reasons Apple provides or more well-known apps kick up the media.

Are you claiming there were "orders of magnitude" more cases which haven't been documented like this one? Or that there are hundreds of thousand or perhaps millions of apps which have been released? If it is the former provide evidence. If it is the latter that means these few isolated cases are even less significant.

And it doesn't seem "arbitrary" at all given how few cases there have been for similar reasons. In fact, the one you highlighted may have very well had the very same problem. Perhaps he created a political cartoon that had language or graphics which were offensive to some parent. We just don't know the details, at least so far.

You could argue the same thing about confederate flags.

I think it is quite clear Apple decided to have the vendor remove the Confederate flag from the app because they felt it was offensive. What other possible reason do you think they had to make the vendor remove the flags?

Now I completely disagree with that decision, as I have already stated numerous times. But I seriously doubt Apple is liable for being sued as a result. Or that it isn't their right to drive away customers with actually arbitrary decisions if they wish to do so.

But it is no secret that many parents don't want their children exposed to profanity or nudity without their express permission. And Apple providing a mechanism where they can do so is hardly "censorship". It is basic common sense.

Or you could Google for any number of other examples:

http://gadgetwise.blogs.nytimes.com...ng-app-from-app-store-and-educators-complain/

According to this article, we simply don't know why they decided to not make it available at the present time. But it also states that no Scratch program runs on any other similar platform either.

So what is your point? That Apple is being "arbitrary" or worse without any actual factual basis?

It is clear that Apple has decided to wisely not share with the general public why it has decided not to allow some media. But I have no doubt they share those specific reasons with the vendor.

"All such companies" essentially includes Apple, Google and MS. Apple is more restrictive than the other two, and is famously difficult to deal with when restricting apps, as they typically don't give you any feedback about why they've rejected your app. In any case, by "more open platform" I'm suggesting not to use a walled garden from any of Apple/Google/MS if this kind of thing bothers you.

So what is even your point?

That is your opinion. And you are certainly entitled to it. But you certainly haven't managed to show it is based on any sort of factual basis so far, instead of it being "arbitrary".

But even if it is true that Apple is more restrictive than other companies it certainly doesn't mean they have no right to do so, even if it is actually arbitrary on their part in a number of cases. After all, they make it quite clear they have specific criteria and that all media must pass their tests. If the vendor actually thinks Apple has no right to do so under the license agreement, I'm sure they will spare no time suing them. And if it makes it to court, we will all find out the details.

And this decision on Apple's part doesn't really personally bother me in the least.I have no iPhone or any other form of smartphone. I don't have the app. And I likely never will. But even if I did have a smartphone and wanted to play this app, I would probably just play it in its edited form while remarking how silly it all was.

 

[Zelig]

Are you claiming there were "orders of magnitude" more cases which haven't been documented like this one? Or that there are hundreds of thousand or perhaps millions of apps which have been released?

Yes.

So what is your point?

That Apple frequently censors stuff.

But it is no secret that many parents don't want their children exposed to profanity or nudity without their express permission. And Apple providing a mechanism where they can do so is hardly "censorship". It is basic common sense.

Parental controls unrelated to censorship.

But I have no doubt they share those specific reasons with the vendor.

Nope, they commonly don't: http://www.icab.de/blog/2013/01/26/app-reviews-are-unpredictable/

You obviously have no experience with this, go talk to any dev who works with Apple. Or don't, since you don't trust me and can't be bothered to look anything up yourself.

it is true that Apple is more restrictive than other companies it certainly doesn't mean they have no right to do so, even if it is actually arbitrary on their part in a number of cases.

That's what I've been saying.

 

[wolfigor]

I disagree with Apple's decision on this, as this kind of thinking can be extended fairly easily to banning anything that whoever's in charge (Apple, the government, Wal-Mart, whoever) feels is offensive. The next Joe McCarthy becomes prominent in Congress? Ban the Soviet flag in games. North Korea hacks another movie studio? Ban the North Korean flag in games. Monarchists are becoming more influential? Ban the pre-French Revolution French flag in games. It's historical revisionism based on what's popular at the present, and I'd rather have freedom on expression and accurate historical games than preventing a few Confederate-sympathizing folks from playing games with Confederate flags on their iDevices.

On a related note, I also don't agree with Wal-Mart not carrying any music CDs with explicit content, for similar reasons. Since it's such a large seller of CDs, it essentially means that many bands have to make a censored version whether they think it is comparable or not, in order to get the sales they need for sustainability. I could see if we were talking about Toys-R-Us where the primary audience is children and explicit lyrics wouldn't be appropriate, but given that Wal-Mart has about as large of a cross-section of an audience as you can get, my impression in both cases is that they're doing it to appear to have the moral upper ground, but are effectively enabling censorship in the process.

That said, I do think that, at least outside of the south, there's usually at least some association between the Confederate flag and racism, and I'd be skeptical of anyone who had it displayed prominently (on a wall, on a flagpole, on a pickup truck, etc. - though not as part of, say, a miniature battle from the Civil War on a table where it was clearly used in historical context). But I don't think the mass-ban by Apple and Wal-Mart is actually a noble action so much as an attempt to be seen that way in the view of most of the public.

There are surely some people, racists, who use the confederate flag as their symbol.
However here in Europe, especially for people of my generation, the confederate flag is equated to the Dukes of Hazard.
General Lee is the car and only far behind a real general from the secession war.

Not joking: the flag represents young rebels , unjustly persecuted, rebelling against the establishment.
And girls like Daisy Duke.

That's the first association that comes to mind with confederate flag.

This is just to say that, please, do not use the American point of view and sensitivity for all other people in the world.

If in USA the confederate flag is associated to slavery and racism as much as a swastika in Germany, then go ahead ban it in USA like the swastika is banned in Germany.

Let the confederate flag be in those countries where it means something completely different.

Example: go in east Asia near a temple and you'll see swastikas everywhere.

 

[Formaldehyde]

That Apple frequently censors stuff.

Yet you haven't actually been able to show that.

Parental controls unrelated to censorship.

Yet that is what the majority of the cases in that Wiki article are, and which have all been labeled as being "censorship".

Nope, they commonly don't: http://www.icab.de/blog/2013/01/26/app-reviews-are-unpredictable/.

One developer whining about the process is hardly proof.

In this particular case, there is little wonder it has run into problems. iCab is an internet browser for the Macintosh where it is allowed without restriction. But Apple has far more stringent requirements for iPhone apps that make it difficult to simply port over a full featured browser to the iPhone. Yet Apple has allowed him to eventually do so after he managed to meet their requirements, despite them telling him what was wrong with it in writing and even on the phone.

What this personally frustrating for him to do so? Apparently so.

Was it "censorship"? Only in the broadest meaning of the word. He clearly isn't allowed to do whatever he wants. He supposedly knew that when he tried to port it to the iPhone. Yet he apparently thought Apple wouldn't even notice.

And here it is now for sale:

iCab Mobile (Web Browser)

You obviously have no experience with this, go talk to any dev who works with Apple. Or don't, since you don't trust me and can't be bothered to look anything up yourself.

Or you can just admit that all this is quite "arbitrary" on the parts of a handful of the developers who try to skirt around Apple's policies in hopes that they don't get caught.

For instance, why in the world would anybody possibly find Smuggle Truck offensive?


Link to video.

 

[Zelig]

Yet you haven't actually been able to show that.

Common knowledge, I provided some links, sorry you don't like them.

 

[Formaldehyde]

The only ones I have been able to find that might even have a case that it is "arbitrary censorship" on the part of Apple are the ones that criticize sweatshops and the way electronic equipment is now made. But that is only because it appears their decision may have been made on the grounds that they make them look bad.

Sweatshop in particular may have been banned on the same grounds as Smuggle Truck and Baby Shaker though.

 

[Zelig]

The only ones I have been able to find that might even have a case that it is "arbitrary censorship" on the part of Apple are the ones that criticize sweatshops and the way electronic equipment is now made. But that is only because it appears their decision may have been made on the grounds that they make them look bad.

arbitrary

Pretty much everything Apple censors qualifies as arbitrary.

 

[Formaldehyde]

You have yet to provide a single example of what I think is "arbitrary", other than what was mentioned in the Wiki article about electronics manufacture. It is just your own personal opinion.

And the facts clearly show otherwise. There are perhaps a few isolated cases which are actually "arbitrary". The rest are quite understandable based on their own clearly stated requirements.

This is entirely consistent with Apple's general censorship policies, and far more mild than various other censorship rules they have.

You could actually make a far better case that removing the confederate flag from the app was "arbitrary" rather than "consistent with Apple's general censorship policies", even though I don't think it was arbitrary at all. They simply decided it was offensive, which according to their stipulations is sufficient.

 

[Zelig]

You have yet to provide a single example of what I think is "arbitrary"

Well I can't force you to agree with the actual meaning of the word.

You could actually make a far better case that removing the confederate flag from the app was "arbitrary" rather than "consistent with Apple's general censorship policies",

They're the same thing.