FARK.com: (4372334) Apple declines newspaper app for iPhone due to the possible access of "adult content" that is readily available through Safari browser

If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Some Page 3 gawker)		Apple declines newspaper app for iPhone due to the possible access of "adult content" that is readily available through Safari browser (geek.com)		29
		More: Asinine

• • •

794 clicks; posted to Business » on 06 May 2009 at 6:06 PM | Favorite | share:

Share this link:

URL:

http://fark.com/go/4372334

Bookmark:

Article Comments close

29 Comments (+0 »)

Archived thread

Theaetetus		2009-05-06 03:24:53 PM

Apple declines newspaper app for iPhone due to the possible access of "adult content" that is readily available through Safari browser... while simultaneously adding "submit it again in about two months when we have Parental Controls working".

Sorry, Subby, nonstory.

Hender		2009-05-06 03:27:05 PM

Didn't we already cover the hypocrisy with the two greenlit stories about the NIN app being rejected?

cambie		2009-05-06 03:38:17 PM

Stay Cool Babylon		2009-05-06 03:49:38 PM

BUT I THOUGHT THAT APPLE WAS TO CHANGE OUR WAY OF THINKING

Epsilon		2009-05-06 03:51:01 PM

So iPhone filters nekkid pics? I prefer to make my own decision as to what content I look at. I don't need my service provider to filter it for me. Thanks.

/Make filters available for those who want them
//But don't force them on everyone

Walker		2009-05-06 03:52:05 PM

Apple is the new Walmart or Blockbuster. Censor censor censor. They even rejected a farting noise app because "the farts sounded too real". That's the whole point!

Tigger		2009-05-06 03:55:54 PM

Good lord. I have no issue with reading this crap if I visited some site like macrumors.com, however this is not a NEWS story, and I am even more disappointed to see this on fark than I am if I'd seen it only local fox news channel.

It's not News it's fark.

May I suggest the following options

1) don't click
2) dont't read
3) don't be a tard

downstairs		2009-05-06 04:32:14 PM

Ok, Apple defenders. You keep defending Apple's rather insane control over programs and the like.

How would you feel if your Apple computer could only run programs approved by Apple? How about only play MP3's approved by iTunes?

Same thing happening here.

Theaetetus		2009-05-06 05:00:30 PM

downstairs: Same thing happening here... for the next two months.

Oh, noes... Censorship... I'm am incensed... Zzzzz

downstairs		2009-05-06 05:04:51 PM

Theaetetus: downstairs: Same thing happening here... for the next two months.

I don't believe they're going to allow 100% of all apps, are they?

"Censorship" is a silly way to describe it, and I didn't use that term.

But its certainly nutty to purchase what is essentially a pocket computer that has its content completely locked down by its provider.

Winktologist		2009-05-06 05:58:27 PM

downstairs: Ok, Apple defenders. You keep defending Apple's rather insane control over programs and the like.

How would you feel if your Apple computer could only run programs approved by Apple? How about only play MP3's approved by iTunes?

Same thing happening here.

How would you like it if your contract with AT&T stipulated that you only sell apps that meet a specific "standard" for content, you couldn't talk about it publicly for fear of damaging your relationship, and everyone blamed you for it?

Apple needs AT&T more than AT&T needs Apple. That's probably what is happening here; AT&T doesn't want "smut" on their network.

downstairs: But its certainly nutty to purchase what is essentially a pocket computer that has its content completely locked down by its provider.

While we're at it, care to biatch about the Nintendo DSi? Didn't think so.

downstairs		2009-05-06 06:02:22 PM

Winktologist: Apple needs AT&T more than AT&T needs Apple. That's probably what is happening here; AT&T doesn't want "smut" on their network.

I don't believe that. AT&T runs ISP's, owns big chunks of the overall Internet network in the US. Plenty of smut going through their network.

As well, Safari browser (as well as mobile IE on PPC) goes over AT&T lines. Again- lotsa smut.

Winktologist: While we're at it, care to biatch about the Nintendo DSi? Didn't think so.

I don't know much about it, but yeah, if its the same deal I'd biatch. I biatch about my WII only being able to run certain apps/games approved by Nintendo.

Hender		2009-05-06 06:16:38 PM

downstairs: I don't know much about it, but yeah, if its the same deal I'd biatch. I biatch about my WII only being able to run certain apps/games approved by Nintendo.

You just described every console maker on the market. No one can publish anything without Sony, Microsoft, or Nintendo approving it since they own the hardware.

itazurakko		2009-05-06 06:23:26 PM

Well hell, it's news to me that there even WAS a "News App." Friend of mine has an iPhone, and it's cool, but we already read the newspaper online with... Safari. Yep.

The_Six_Fingered_Man		2009-05-06 06:37:21 PM

itazurakko: Well hell, it's news to me that there even WAS a "News App." Friend of mine has an iPhone, and it's cool, but we already read the newspaper online with... Safari. Yep.

I used to have the AP and NYT apps. They were shiat, so I dropped them. All we need now is iFark.

The Angry Hand of God		2009-05-06 06:40:17 PM

Winktologist: downstairs: Ok, Apple defenders. You keep defending Apple's rather insane control over programs and the like.

How would you feel if your Apple computer could only run programs approved by Apple? How about only play MP3's approved by iTunes?

Same thing happening here.

How would you like it if your contract with AT&T stipulated that you only sell apps that meet a specific "standard" for content, you couldn't talk about it publicly for fear of damaging your relationship, and everyone blamed you for it?

Apple needs AT&T more than AT&T needs Apple. That's probably what is happening here; AT&T doesn't want "smut" on their network.

downstairs: But its certainly nutty to purchase what is essentially a pocket computer that has its content completely locked down by its provider.

While we're at it, care to biatch about the Nintendo DSi? Didn't think so.

My PSP is the best hand held gaming system ever. I have always wondered what that little door in the back is for though. What the hell is a UMD?

The_Six_Fingered_Man		2009-05-06 06:44:11 PM

The Angry Hand of God: Winktologist: downstairs: Ok, Apple defenders. You keep defending Apple's rather insane control over programs and the like.

How would you feel if your Apple computer could only run programs approved by Apple? How about only play MP3's approved by iTunes?

Same thing happening here.

How would you like it if your contract with AT&T stipulated that you only sell apps that meet a specific "standard" for content, you couldn't talk about it publicly for fear of damaging your relationship, and everyone blamed you for it?

Apple needs AT&T more than AT&T needs Apple. That's probably what is happening here; AT&T doesn't want "smut" on their network.

downstairs: But its certainly nutty to purchase what is essentially a pocket computer that has its content completely locked down by its provider.

While we're at it, care to biatch about the Nintendo DSi? Didn't think so.

My PSP is the best hand held gaming system ever. I have always wondered what that little door in the back is for though. What the hell is a UMD?

I've used that little door in the back before. It's used for testing the software before release. (at least in my experiences)

On other machines, it is hooked up to a CPU with the UMD slot.

kpottruff		2009-05-06 06:46:00 PM

Stay Cool Babylon: BUT I THOUGHT THAT APPLE WAS TO CHANGE OUR WAY OF THINKING

They did for me, my sexual fantasies now include fisting and small lizards.

The_Six_Fingered_Man		2009-05-06 06:47:27 PM

kpottruff: Stay Cool Babylon: BUT I THOUGHT THAT APPLE WAS TO CHANGE OUR WAY OF THINKING

They did for me, my sexual fantasies now include fisting and small lizards.

There's an app for that.

Winktologist		2009-05-06 06:49:04 PM

Some things in life have an iPhone App in the App Store. For everything else, there's jailbreaking.

thrgd456		2009-05-06 06:54:07 PM

ummm...what about youporn and redtube?

The_Six_Fingered_Man		2009-05-06 06:59:39 PM

thrgd456: ummm...what about youporn and redtube?

Are there specific apps for that or can you just view them through Safari? If the latter, then congratulations on reading the headline.

Carth		2009-05-06 07:34:33 PM

downstairs: I biatch about my WII only being able to run certain apps/games approved by Nintendo.

Did it stop you from buying a wii or enjoy it?

Kierkegaard's Pseudonym		2009-05-06 08:12:40 PM

Winktologist: How would you like it if your contract with AT&T stipulated that you only sell apps that meet a specific "standard" for content, you couldn't talk about it publicly for fear of damaging your relationship, and everyone blamed you for it?

Apple needs AT&T more than AT&T needs Apple. That's probably what is happening here; AT&T doesn't want "smut" on their network.

The shapes your brain had to contort into to deflect blame away from Apple gave me a headache just reading it.

WALMART.saves		2009-05-06 08:30:59 PM

What Apple has become:
idology.files.wordpress.com

/hot

lepton68		2009-05-06 08:40:45 PM

The linked website censored the picture....

Apple's upcoming iPhone software will allow a user to lockout adult-rated apps, but that isn't really an answer either. What do you do about something like this app, or Safari. They can bring up adult content, so do you rate them adults only?

My iPhone app can bring up a screen with online help. But even there you can probably touch a link that goes to my blog that goes to an ad that goes to a link that goes to an adult ad that goes to adult content. You'd pretty much have to censor everything that touches the Web. This whole censorship thing is kind of nutty.

spyderqueen		2009-05-06 09:15:53 PM

Winktologist
Apple needs AT&T more than AT&T needs Apple.

You're kidding right? Considering the appeal the iPhone has created for itself, you don't think Verizon or T-Mobile or Sprint would jump on the chance to steal it from AT&T? Apple definitely does not NEED AT&T.

AmazingRuss		2009-05-06 11:24:32 PM

I had an update to an app kicked back twice last mont, mainly because the evaluator couldn't figure out how to work it. From the quality of the english in the emails, I'm guessing he was overseas in some sweatshop, grinding through apps all day. Given the volume they have to process, it wouldn't surprise me.

Apple is pretty uptight about what they'll take, but I think most of the egregious cases are just worker bee evaluator error.

/was still pretty pissed about it though

vort3xxx		2009-05-07 04:34:37 PM

Hender: Didn't we already cover the hypocrisy with the two greenlit stories about the NIN app being rejected?

Pehaps, but Apple has taken over the masthead for the cnn.com webpage this week, negating most of the outrage coming from technophiles with a massive propaganda campaign designed to drown out all of their negative press in recent weeks. Given that, its only fair to greenlight it a few more times.

Displayed 29 of 29 comments

Redisplay/refresh comments

This thread is closed to new comments.