RSSApple: No, we didn't censor an iPhone dictionary
By Tim Conneally | Published August 7, 2009, 12:02 PM
It takes a lot to get Apple to make a statement to the public, but the ongoing controversy related to the company's App Store review policy has come to such an agitated peak that Apple has repeatedly been forced to explain itself.
Yesterday, Senior Vice President Phil Schiller had to make a stand against allegations of downright censorship by the blogosphere.
The issue at hand was an iPhone dictionary app called Ninjawords which was rejected from the App Store on the grounds that it contained overly vulgar "urban slang" which Apple's review team worried would be offensive.
Responding to the blogosphere's accusation that Apple demanded the app be both filtered and carry a 17+ parental control rating, Phil Schiller wrote to Daring Fireball blogger John Gruber, saying:
"The issue that the App Store reviewers did find with the Ninjawords application is that it provided access to other more vulgar terms than those found in traditional and common dictionaries, words that many reasonable people might find upsetting or objectionable. A quick search on Wiktionary.org easily turns up a number of offensive "urban slang" terms that you won't find in popular dictionaries such as one that you referenced, the New Oxford American Dictionary included in Mac OS X. Apple rejected the initial submission of Ninjawords for this reason, provided the Ninjawords developer with information about some of the vulgar terms, and suggested to the developer that they resubmit the application for approval once parental controls were implemented on the iPhone.The Ninjawords developer then decided to filter some offensive terms in the Ninjawords application and resubmit it for approval for distribution in the App Store before parental controls were implemented. Apple did not ask the developer to censor any content in Ninjawords, the developer decided to do that themselves in order to get to market faster. Even though the developer chose to censor some terms, there still remained enough vulgar terms that it required a parental control rating of 17+."
Apple did not ask the developer to censor any content...it just suggested he resubmit the app once parental controls were in place, at which point it would be flagged with a rating that would block the app from kids anyway.
Schiller does manage to mostly free Apple from blame in this situation, but pointing the finger at the bad guy here is less important than the fact that the information contained within Ninjawords, however vulgar or offensive, remains the hapless victim. And whenever information is stifled, you can expect the Internet to come looking for a way to set it free.
It was the media storm which brought the FCC to Apple's door, and it was the blog storm that brought Schiller to the podium.
Apple needs to wake up and smell the coffee, nobody likes filtered content, nobody likes censorship. If they don't find a way to change directions fast, crucifixion is in their future.
The 1984 Macintosh commercial defined for millions who Apple was, the company that would fight the powers that oppress and restrict... and now they are who they pretended to fight against. Their users fight the Apple imposed DRM, they fight the Apple filters, they fight the Apple firmware developers so they can run what they want. It is obvious that Apple was never interested in the ideals they preached, only making money. I for one cannot condone such profiteering. The business practices of Apple and M$ may be unsavory but Apple's betrayal goes deeper.
Score: 0
|I don't agree with Apple on how they decide things. They've made a load of mistakes already because it seems they're making it up as they go along. If IBM were doing it, they'd have a manual 400 pages thick on how to qualify applications.
Score: 0
|Ninjawords certainly found a good way to get publicity. With only a tiny percentage of iPhone apps getting any downloads, if you can get people to take up your "censorship" case, it can be worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in free press.
Score: 1
|the whole google censor thing has already been settled, sorta...
Score: 0
|Why doesn't the government make the call??
Score: -1
|is that mean apple needs to censor safari as well, since when you open the safari browser, there is a google box, searching an offensive words would be piece of cake.
Score: 1
|safari lead me to midget or little people porn once... :S don't ask me how...
seriously, its a dictionary, its not like the name of the app is 'niqqerwords' replace q with g which i could see being rejected no? ... there is nothing wrong with slang and there is nothing wrong with learning about uses of slang within a dictionary, etc, folks deserve to be informed if they so wish to be, term above was and still is a legit term for some folks, good or bad
i watched a movie the other day, uh 'class of 84' that term was used, now a kid seeing that movie today might of never heard it before and want to look it up on his/her iPhone
Score: 1
|I'm going to defend Apple on this one, because as someone with just about everyone around him having babies, friends and families alike, I know for a fact that mom's and dads alike would make a big stink if their kid told them they found certain words in a dictionary on their Iphone...yes, I know the information is READILY available online BUT it's different when the blame can be centralized (Iphone = blame Apple) than when it's decentralized (Internet = blame, um um!...not parent, um um...Internet? No, that doesn't work).
Think of this like you'd think of Movies and Videogames....people tend to blame these mediums vs. their parenting, and I think that in this case Apple is smart for not putting out an App that could induce a blamestorm from Parents.
As the article noted, they didn't censor the words, just the fact that the App needs to wait on Parental Controls to be implemented in the phone's software. I think that's fine.
Score: 2
|First, to say that the developer should have just waited for the 17+ rating to become available, so he could release an ‘uncensored’ version is being disingenuous, because Apple wouldn’t tell him WHEN it would become available (perhaps other than sometime soon). Meanwhile, his competition, which also was uncensored (according to Phil), and with much lower ratings, was already in the app store being sold.
Second, Phil’s claim that it rejected because of new ‘urban slang’ swear words, and not regular swear words doesn’t seem to match with the specific examples the developer claims the App Store reviewer sent him, namely screen shots with 'standard' swear words.
Score: 0
|Come on. The problem here isn't apple, a dictionary, censorship, etc.. The problem here is the fact that parents are, or are thinking about, buying a kid an iphone, or any smartphone for that matter. A kid doesn't need anything other than a phone to call 911, their parents, and carry around as a gps tracker so their parents can know where they are.
Unplug the freaking game systems, cell phones, computers and take your kids to the park. Throw a ball with them, sign them up for little league, basketball, hell, even football. Get them off their butts. Bring them up with good morals, good diet, knowledge how to cook and you don't have to worry about the crap that apple does or does not do.
George Lopez, not to mention the leader of the free world, have shared the importance of raising your kids well. If you don't want to listen to them, listen to me. Would you prefer your child have strong thumbs or strong mind?
Score: 2
|"...the fact that the information contained within Ninjawords, however vulgar or offensive, remains the hapless victim. And whenever information is stifled, you can expect the Internet to come looking for a way to set it free."
LOL Yes users on the internet have nothing better to do than to set free some selected vulgar terms :P. Even I have to agree with apple on this one, unless the app writer comes back and say that's not the way it happened. My question to apple is why DOESN'T the iPhone have parental controls already?
Score: 1
|can't users visit urban dictionary in the browser, is there an urban dictionary app? lol that would be awesome, someone should create it just to **** with Apple 'don't like urban slang eh? get a load of we!', blows the mind at what their userbase puts up with...
Score: 1
|i'd like to know what these words are/were... i guess that can't be disclosed eh?
Score: 1
|