“After four days of confusion and adolescent hand-wringing, Apple finally spoke out about the change of policy that has removed thousands of risqué applications from its iPhone App Store,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune.
“The response came in an interview that senior vice president Phil Schiller gave Jenna Wortham of The New York Times,” Elmer-DeWitt reports. “‘It came to the point where we were getting customer complaints from women who found the content getting too degrading and objectionable, as well as parents who were upset with what their kids were able to see,’ Mr. Schiller said.”
“‘At the end of the day, Apple has a brand to maintain,’ Piper Jaffray’s Gene Munster, told the Times. ‘And the bottom line is they want that image to be squeaky clean.’ Munster linked the purge to the release of the iPad tablet computer next month, which Apple plans to market for home and school use,” Elmer-DeWitt reports. “But neither he nor Schiller could satisfactorily explain why thousands of apps showing bikini clad women were removed, while Playboy and the Sports Illustrated swimsuit edition were permitted to stay.”
Full article here.
Neil Hughes reports for AppleInsider, “As Apple has officially clarified its new ban on ‘overtly sexual content’ in the App Store, one application featuring pictures of women in bikinis — to sell beachwear — found itself removed.”
“Designer swimwear retailer Simply Beach, based in the U.K., was removed from the iPhone and iPod touch App Store last Friday,” Hughes reports. “Andrew Long, managing director of Exploding Phone, the firm responsible for developing the application, spoke with AppleInsider about the situation. He said his company received the same e-mail that Apple sent to other developers, which stated ‘overtly sexual content’ was being removed from the download destination due to “numerous complaints” from customers.”
Hughes reports, “The developer has attempted to contact Apple since last Friday to no avail, but Long feels like the Simply Beach application has been wrongfully removed from the App Store, because it does not feature any sexual content. He said the store is showing off its products, some of which happen to be bikinis. The pictures, he said, are the exact same found on the Simply Beach official Web site, simplybeach.com.”
Read more in the full article here.
MacDailyNews Take: Apple should take care not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “Carl H.” for the heads up.]
Simply Beach is a little tame. But I guess that means no Wicked Weasel app is going to show up now.
for a taste of some seriously good swimwear, http://wickedweasel.com/en
For the people that call women in bikinis and swimsuits “P0RN”… are you f**king kidding me?!
Here’s a preview of Victoria’s Secret 2010 catalogue as shown on iPods & iPhones near you:
this has been a hoot! what makes you think you have a right to have sexually overt content delivered over your iPod?
So I guess they are ok with me not buying their product because of the lack of overtly sexual applications… Apple makes a great product and I buy Macs exclusively, but I haven’t jumped on board with the iPhone or Touch because of the strictness that encompasses these devices…Their loss, most soccer moms don’t have the deep pockets that testosterone fueled men do.
@ Trevor…………….Nicely put young sir. My point is most newspapers (and not only the cheap tabloids) have on a daily basis some form of female “exposure” be it through advertising or merely part of an article of that particular day, yet there is no clamour for the worlds press to stop printing such explicit material, and if there is you’d bet that the advertising revenue far outweighs any whining from the protestors. So with the onset of the soon to be released iPad we have the same problem raising it’s ugly head. I am certain that the papers charging subscriptions for perusal on the iPad will continue to produce explicit advertising etc. So dear readers, what do you think the outcome would be if as our own form of censorship we all chose NOT to rush out and buy a lovely new iPad. Not because we are offended by the material we might see portrayed on it screen. No, simply because we don’t need anyone telling us what we can or cannot have. So those of you out there that feel agrieved by this matter, stand up for yourselves and refuse to buy an iPad until they come to their senses. When the sales of the hardware are down lower than expectation I suspect they might have a change of heart.
@Macduff sadly I feel that Apple would relax their policy only to strictly enforce it again later. I love Apple products, but I absolutely hate the stranglehold they are putting on content.
I’m glad that Apple is getting rid of the smut. Like any store they have the right to only supply products of their choosing. And those apps only serve one degrading purpose. Those of you who are completely enraged by this need to zip your pants back up and do something productive.
@KiLler…………………I think your right about that mon ami. Unfortunately I sometimes get carried away with my emotions, and Lao sadly I fear that the sheep will still meekly bleet their way to the apple store on opening day and purchase their next toy whereas I may (if I can control myself long enough) wait until next year before succumbing to temptation.
Ummm . . . isn’t it funny (in a sad kind of way) how none of this even begins to address the fact that nudity — in and of itself — is not “erotic”?
And to the best of my knowledge, nudity is banned from the App Store (and many other aspects of American life).
Mind you, I’m not talking about sexual nudity — just simple nudity. Because it’s always what’s “hidden” that makes something titillating. Hence, the inherent “eroticism” of the “bathing suit” app in question.
Man, I’m an American myself, but as a culture we really need to grow up about the human body. I mean, what if someone among the hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of naturists and nudists in this country developed an “app” that helped lead people to naturist parks or clothing-optional beaches or clubs? Or simply rated them? Or gave advice on sunscreen or clothing-optional beach etiquette?
And think about this: Many Americans are so naive and misinformed that they actually think a mere nude picture of someone under the age of 18 is . . . <GASP> . . . “child pornography”. That isn’t true, either.
Lots of busybodies in the good old U.S. of A., yessir.
Apple’s technically right on this, of course, since it’s their store. But still . . . FAIL.
Apple ha taken thus too far! Remove Safari if it’s a serious problem! People should deluge Apple with a barage of complaints that there IS NOT ENOUGH “sexy” material on the app store. I don’t need/buy the shit but feel strongly that if there is a market for it then it should be available. And to those who object…DON’T DOWNLOAD IT TO YOUR PHONE…IDIOT!
Apple’s pure bull-s&*t hypocrisy is showing up in full force here. Apple has every right to say what can and can’t get into the App Store. Fine. Great, whatever.
The stench of their hypocrisy comes into the picture as soon as Apple refuses to apply the rules they made to *everyone, evenly and fairly*. Everyone keeps pointing out the Playboy and Sports Illustrated Swimsuit app are still in. Plus, Victoria’s Secret, Penthouse, Maxim, FHM etc. These are somehow less titillating than any of the ones you booted?
Come on Apple. Either ban them all or tell us the real truth … major media conglomerates are OK, the rest of you can go f-yourselves. Shiller’s explanation is the biggest crock of horse manure I’ve seen served in a long time.
You’re doing to the smaller developers nothing more or less than most of want to do to those bikini models.
And I’m an Apple fanboy since my first Apple IIe. Jeez. The depths they’ve sunk to … I want my pirate flag back at Apple HQ! Just goes to show that corporations are all the same in the end. Pathethic, manipulative liars.
This probably has more to do with Apple’s recent announcement of 13 new iTunes stores. Countries such as Mali, Jordan, Tunisia and Niger are all conservative Muslim countries. It would be offensive and obscene in those places to show women in bikinis, even in a non erotic context. This is likely the real reason behind the heavy handed app removals.
@ CC
no it doesn’t , as each store is tailored to that region
@macaholic – Wow! All camel toe, all the time. Site seems to be in overload right now.
gee…i wonder how that happened?
@average joe-you mean something productive like sitting around posting to a blog judging other people? Thanks for the advice ya hypocritical prude…
Why does anyone need pornography? Why not learn to treat women with respect, and have a real relationship instead of an adolescent fantasy. I applaud the adults at Apple for having common sense. Do you like real food, or just pictures of food? Find a soulmate. Find a wife. Get a life!
Odd that Apple still doesn’t allow the user to remove Safari and all the porn available on their app.
Oh right. When I do it, it’s fine. When other’s do it, well, that’s disgusting.
@Marvin Jarboe-I’m happily married for 14 yrs, in the same relationship for 19 and abstained till after the marriage, all the while remaining faithful… I owe it all to nudity(not pornography, that’s different, look it up). Not to mention, the female form is beautiful… hell the male form is beautiful also. Live your life your way, I’ll live mine my way…
Say it with me folks…. PAYOFFS by Playboy and Sports Illustrated! Apple should be ashamed for blatant censorship, but in the end, it’s all about the Benjamins.
“Apple should take care not to throw the baby out with the bathwater.”
Or the even the babe.
A purge on swimwear pictures? I think I fell through a time warp. What year is this?
How can pictures of people (male or female) be objectionable if they adhere to commonly accepted standards for advertising?
I remember the days that I had never seen a female body, and to compensate I bought myself an issue of Playboy. But times have changed. Any of the pictures in that magazine would today be acceptable for public display. I am confident however, that most of the removed apps don’t even have pictures of that.
IMHO the fact that thinly clad men/women are now commonplace in advertising, is to the benefit of our youth. It does create a certain numbness, but in a benign way. At least they won’t be obsessed if they see someone attractive.
Day after day I am appalled at the conservative puritanism of (certain parts of) the US society. At a superficial level that is. Anything goes in different circumstances. How’s that for double standards?
erste konkrete Hinweise auf neue iMacs und Mac minis: Konfigurationsdateien in den Tiefen bestimmter Versionen von Mac OS X weisen auf iMac und Mac mini-Modelle mit dem neuen Nvidia MCP79-Chipset hin. Die neuen, http://www.eluxury-brands.com/chanel.html