[hurley_108]

Valleywag Valleywag:

Apple is caught in the crossfire between opponents and supporters of an iPhone game that can only be "won" by signaling opposition to gay and abortion rights. Apple approved the app, then pulled it. Now comes the furious lobbying.

The fight over the "Manhattan Declaration" app, which asks users to pledge not to "bend to any rule purporting to force us to bless immoral sexual partnerships" like gay and lesbian ones, began when Apple approved the app for inclusion in its store earlier this year. The battle continued when the company removed the app over the Thanksgiving holiday under pressure from gay rights groups. Now the original authors plan to resubmit the app without the its featured quiz, which you could only pass by submitting "correct" anti-gay answers. GLAAD, meanwhile, is gathering signatures to pressure Apple to reject the revised app.

Apple will inevitably piss off some significant group of customers here, but the company only has itself to blame, since it eagerly embraced morality as a test for inclusion in the app store. CEO Steve Jobs designated the store as a place with "freedom from porn" and from risqué fashion spreads, illustrated gay literature, political caricature and other controversial content.

Now every time Apple approves an app, it implies moral endorsement of the content of that app. Rejections likewise carry an implied moral condemnation. The right answer here is for Apple to support gay rights, but an even better answer would be if Apple could say it supports free speech and argument in the app store within the boundaries of the law and is not going to intervene in disputes over morality. Of course that option is off the table now due to Apple's track record; it would be an obviously false statement.

Have fun playing moral traffic cop, Apple. In the meantime we'll just sit here and wait for Dan Savage to turn the phrase "Manhattan Declaration" into code for some sort of gay sex practice. Blowjobs on the subway, maybe?

Things are only going to get worse, Apple, as more people make more apps that skirt or cross the (inherently indefinable) boundaries of moral acceptability. Probably best to shape up now, stop playing morality police, and let everything through that is protected free speech.

[Unsound]

Yes please, you have no idea how much I miss the regular updates to my Baberoo app.

[hurley_108]

Unsound Unsound:

Yes please, you have no idea how much I miss the regular updates to my Baberoo app.

It's not just about porn. There are plenty of what seem like softcore porn apps already anyways. It's a larger issue that also covers, as mentioned, the caricature of public figures including politicians. If our frindly neighborhood JJ felt the desire to make a Filibuster Cartoons app, it would be rejected. That's not right.

[Unsound]

Baberoo wasn't porn, it was bikini girls and amatuer self shots. It was like getting the sunshone girl on my phone. Except more than 1 a day and a much higher percentage were worth looking at.

[hurley_108]

Unsound Unsound:

Baberoo wasn't porn, it was bikini girls and amatuer self shots. It was like getting the sunshone girl on my phone. Except more than 1 a day and a much higher percentage were worth looking at.

Heh, sorry, I thought you were being facetious!

[Unsound]

Lol only partially. It really did kind of piss me off when the app was discontinued because apple didn't want that kind of stuff on their phone. A phone that's internet capable... the app just made it convenient, porn is still just a click away for those who want it. Me, I'll wait till I get home to a full size screen, but having morality dictated to me by an electronics manufacturer is just a little annoying.

[Brenda]

$1:

having morality dictated to me by an electronics manufacturer is just a little annoying.

I am actually surprised that companies know morality at all...

(I agree with you, btw, it is up to you what you buy, and as long as it is not illegal, it should be available.)

[raydan]

Brenda Brenda:

$1:

having morality dictated to me by an electronics manufacturer is just a little annoying.

I am actually surprised that companies know morality at all...

(I agree with you, btw, it is up to you what you buy, and as long as it is not illegal, it should be available.)

Apple wants to appear holier than holy.
Problem is, this always comes back to bite you.

[romanP]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Things are only going to get worse, Apple, as more people make more apps that skirt or cross the (inherently indefinable) boundaries of moral acceptability. Probably best to shape up now, stop playing morality police, and let everything through that is protected free speech.

Apple is not the government. If someone wants to write software that gets ignorant people to vote in favour of oppressing minorities, they can do that anywhere they want to on the internet. Apple does not have to publish such garbage, and is right in standing up for oppressed minorities.

[romanP]

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Unsound Unsound:

Yes please, you have no idea how much I miss the regular updates to my Baberoo app.

It's not just about porn. There are plenty of what seem like softcore porn apps already anyways. It's a larger issue that also covers, as mentioned, the caricature of public figures including politicians. If our frindly neighborhood JJ felt the desire to make a Filibuster Cartoons app, it would be rejected. That's not right.

Why is not right? It's a piece of software for a digital Swiss army knife made by a company that has set standards for what they want running on their product. If you don't like it, don't buy the product. I live quite happily without owning any Apple products, and I'm sure you can too.

[romanP]

Unsound Unsound:

Lol only partially. It really did kind of piss me off when the app was discontinued because apple didn't want that kind of stuff on their phone. A phone that's internet capable... the app just made it convenient, porn is still just a click away for those who want it. Me, I'll wait till I get home to a full size screen, but having morality dictated to me by an electronics manufacturer is just a little annoying.

How is this any different from taking a game you've developed where you harass black people, wear white robes and cowls, and light up crosses on the lawns of your enemies to a gaming company, and they reject it because they don't publish racist software?

You're free to develop this racist game on your own time and sell it where ever you want to on the internet. But no company has to agree to develop and be associated with it if they don't like it. Just because you want stuff doesn't mean you get it. Most people over the age of five are aware of this fact.

[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

Just because you want stuff doesn't mean you get it.

is this the line you feed your mom when she asks you to leave her basement and find a job?

[Johnny_H]

Anyone remember the "shaken baby app", I didn't think it could get any worse after that.

[hurley_108]

romanP romanP:

hurley_108 hurley_108:

Things are only going to get worse, Apple, as more people make more apps that skirt or cross the (inherently indefinable) boundaries of moral acceptability. Probably best to shape up now, stop playing morality police, and let everything through that is protected free speech.

Apple is not the government. If someone wants to write software that gets ignorant people to vote in favour of oppressing minorities, they can do that anywhere they want to on the internet. Apple does not have to publish such garbage, and is right in standing up for oppressed minorities.

See - this is where my left wing bone really twinges. So what if they're a corporation and not a government? That gives them the right to restrict free speech on the devices they make? Corporations are now as powerful as governments and the former should be held to the standards that we decided the latter needed to be held to.

Besides, Apple's not doing anything as noble as standing up for repressed minorities here. They're looking out for nothing more than their highly coveted, highly polished coporate image.

Furthermore, an iThing isn't a mall or other public space over which a private interest has clear ownership. It is my device which I have paid for with my money. Why does El Jobso get a say in what I am and am not allowed to put on it? Sure, I could jailbreak it and get the alternate app store Cydia, but that forces me to choose between maintaining warrany coverage and free use of my property. I dont' feel it's right to make people make that choice.

[EyeBrock]

I agree and disagree Hurley. Corporations such as Apple rely on their image as much as their products. It's up to them how they employ corporate governance. If they are wrong they lose sales, simple.