Censorship in the App store

[rixte]

Originally Posted by Phogg

My definition is what I was taught in civics classes back in the 1960s when spent a couple weeks covering censorship, and why it is wrong when it is abused.

I oppose degrading the nuance of language. See?

I'm not sure the connection you're making between the degrading of language unless you're working with the assumption that language began and ended with your 1960s civics class and all definitions before and since are invalid! Cenorship is, I assure you, a much older concept than that.

[GntlmnBndt]

The definition seems to be an issue. Since Wikipedia is not considered reliable, I have looked at a few dictionaries, and most boil down to something similar to Merriam-Webster. Censorship is defined as the act of censoring, and the transitive verb Censor is defined as follows (quoted from www.m-w.com):

censor
Function:
transitive verb
Inflected Form(s):
cen·sored; cen·sor·ing Listen to the pronunciation of censoring \ˈsen(t)-sə-riŋ, ˈsen(t)s-riŋ\
Date:
1882

: to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news> ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>

As I said, so long as my access is not restricted, I do not have a problem with Apple's self-censorship of their store, but censorship it still is. However, it is self-censorship, not censorship of others. They have not restricted the author's ability to sell his book to iPhone users through Fictionwise, Books On Board, etc.

The Bandit

[curtw]

Sounds like the App store folks need to talk to the Music store folks to get a clue. The free "song of the week" just a couple of weeks ago was a Euro-pop-rap number called "J*zz In My Pants" (and no, the redacted letter is not an "a"). And I know they've offered other free songs with the "Explicit" warning. Now they won't even sell this book. Have they ever listened to the Gangsta rap they sell?

[GntlmnBndt]

Originally Posted by Phogg

Regionally they may be very big where you are. I got into MP3's with the early RIO players, and the hard drives in Ipods made them entirely unsuited to my usage. most early adopters I know have moved onto convergence use with cell phones now.

I don't agree, but does that make them a niche player in phones and music retail?

The Bandit

[Madam Broshkina]

Then again this is available at the APP Store (Warning-Gizmodo labels this NSFW.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vBRoG...bs-is-approved

[acidzebra]

I'd have to agree with Phogg here - Apple is free to sell or promote whatever they want, or indeed choose not to do the same. All the cries of censorship and/or the popularity of the iphone have nothing to do with it.

Don't like it? Don't buy the product. I certainly don't. Apple has been decidedly hack-unfriendly for a very long time.

ps. the wikipedia definition of corporate censorships states:
"Corporate censorship is the process by which editors in corporate media outlets intervene to halt the publishing of information that portrays their business or business partners in a negative light. Privately owned corporations in the business of reporting the news also sometimes refuse to distribute information due to the potential loss of advertiser revenue or shareholder value which adverse publicity may bring."

That doesn't seem to apply here.

[Elsi]

There have been similar criticisms of Wal-Mart for refusing to carry books with certain "bad language" or even "unacceptable content". In some cases, a "Wal-Mart edition" is created that meets Wal-Mart's standards and this edition is different from the edition sold through other markets. In other cases, the author doesn't feel too strongly about the language and a revised edition is produced and released through all markets. And, there are cases where the author has insisted on keeping the book as written and recognizes that the book will not be sold through Wal-Mart.

An interesting case was Susan Grant's book Contact which Wal-Mart chose not to carry in 2002 because the theme of a 747 airliner being sucked into a spaceship was too close to the 747 hi-jackings of 9/11.

I think both Phogg and the other side make interesting points. As a point of law, "censorship" may only apply to a government or quasi-governmental agency (such as a school district), but the word in and of itself does not require any such weight.

Merriam-Webster online:

Main Entry: cen·sor·ship
1 a: the institution, system, or practice of censoring b: the actions or practices of censors ; especially : censorial control exercised repressively

Main Entry: censor
Inflected Form(s): cen·sored; cen·sor·ing
to examine in order to suppress or delete anything considered objectionable <censor the news> ; also : to suppress or delete as objectionable <censor out indecent passages>

There is nothing in these definitions that states that the one doing the censoring is in an official or governmental position. All I can see is an implication that censorship is performed by one with enough power to do so. A parent censors which TV shows, movies, music, or books enter their homes and are accessed by her children. In fact, even "self censorship" is a valid concept -- I have the power to censor what I buy/read/eat/hear/think.

[Penforhire]

I think Phogg is downplaying the impact of the iPhone and Apple's formal policies on other markets. The argument over the definition of censorship is absurd. My American Heritage office edition clearly agrees that Apple is censoring. He is entitled to ignore warning signs (and hold to an incorrect definition of censorship) as much as I'm entitled to yell the sky is falling.

Apple has been known to listen to customers. Make a stink.

[Elfwreck]

They are free to sell what they want. They are free to require edits to sell books in their store. That doesn't make it "not censorship." Censorship is the act of blocking or removing content, regardless of explanation or legality or morality of the blocks.

Some types of censorship are expected--news media censoring reports of random wingnuts who insist UFOs are trying to take over the White House, for example. The reporters can decide some reports are irrelevant, or inaccurate, and censor those from their coverage.

We *need* censors--there's too much sheer *stuff* in the world for us to not use some kind of filters.

And "refusal to carry a book because of the language therein" is an ancient practice of booksellers of all sorts. (Starting with situations like, "None of my customers will buy books printed in Arabic, so I don't actually care how well-written it is.") Many bookstores won't carry comic books/graphic novels, or won't carry the more graphic or explicit ones--they don't want to appeal to those customers.

However, refusing to carry a book for a few instances of the f-word strikes a lot of us as either shockingly naive, or annoyingly dogmatic.

[Seabound]

Well, apparently, part of the reason Carnoy agreed to censor himself is because he's a big believer in ebooks. Good on him. I'd like to think I would've told Apple to go to hell if I were in his place, but that's easy for me to say. If I were actually trying to push a book, I wouldn't put it beneath me to kiss some asses (and then gargle afterwards).

Can anyone give an example of a song that iTunes sells with "objectionable content" in it? Just one is all it takes for Apple to look even sillier over this case.

"I decided to censor because it wasn't that big a deal. I changed it very little. It's more important to have people check the book out--along with the whole concept of ebooks on the iPhone. It's kind of virgin territory now, but it's going to be really big soon," Carnoy said in an e-mail.

[curtw]

Originally Posted by Seabound

Can anyone give an example of a song that iTunes sells with "objectionable content" in it? Just one is all it takes for Apple to look even sillier over this case.

There are hundreds of them. For the artists I buy, like Liz Phair and Bowling for Soup, iTunes sometimes, but not always offers both an "Explicit" and a "Clean" version.

Strangely, for Liz Phair, her song "F*ck and Run" does not have the "Explicit" tag, and they offer a "Clean" version of "Six Dick Pimp." go figure