Apple: Satire + iPhone app = Bad

[Michael Essany]

Image via SomeEcards


Apple has shot down a proposed iPhone app due to potentially inappropriate content that could offend many of the public figures and other notable celebrities it offends. As our friends at Wired have just reported, Apple refused to give the green light to SomeEcards, which pretty much offers biting satire all the time.

In its rejection letter, Apple said it could not accept the SomeEcards app because it “contains objectionable content and content that ridicules public figures.”

Of the many questionable apps that Apple has approved within the last year, it's moderately difficult to grasp why SomeEcards would meet a roadblock while a broad number of other applications (and in my opinion, much more potentially offensive apps) are allowed to roll right in.

SomeEcards, for example, doesn't do a fraction of the harm that "Baby Shaker," for example, could have led to.

Its important to note that Apple didn't catch SomeEcards trying to sneak under the radar and work its way into the App Store. SomeEcards did the right thing by rating their app "17+." And they made no claims about their material being anything but pure satire and ridiculous mockery of a host of issues, people, and ideas.

But, alas, it wasn't good enough for Apple.

Of course, if you want to talk "inappropriate," I think just about anyone who has visited the App store lately can find an app or two that, while harmless to most, could offend somebody. Then again, with everyone so touchy and sensitive these days, couldn't a case be made that thousands of approved apps could be taken as highly offensive?

In a response to Apple’s letter, SomeEcards co-founder Duncan Mitchell said the rejected cards were clearly satiric. He requested clarification on the rejection, adding that other apps contain similarly satiric material.

The latest rejection only draws further awareness to Apple's seemingly random, inconsistent, and otherwise difficult to predict methodologies used to approve or reject apps. Is it time to do abolish the app approval process altogether, baring of course, anything grossly inappropriate or encouraging of dangerous or threatening activities?

Some say yes in response to that question. And I'm with them. Are you?

[BlackWolf]

no, you can't get rid of the app approval process. the fact alone that apps are allowed to get your personal phone number and your contacts make that a no-go.

still, I can't see why apple can't set out CLEAR rules for apps. This whole app store thing is really bad PR for them and it makes no sense at all. Why not approve every app that isn't illegal in some way and doesn't contain viruses or spyware? I don't get it. It's just so stupid.

[mikerlx]

I think there should be an approval app there's an app for just about everything....

[one1]

Apple has clearly demonstrated lately their involvement with political affairs, their greenpeace stance, and a host of moralities that do not belong in a business model. Even with the iPhone expanding to new countries, I'd watch my pennies if I were a stock holder. It's looking like apple is about to get a little "too personal" since Steve had so much time to think while waiting on that liver scar to heal. If I had money in the company I'd tell him to leave his personal feelings at home and get us stock holders paid. Business model, not personal agenda pipeline.

[yomamashump]

Thank you Apple for protecting me from stuff. I need you to do this as I cannot decide for myself what is right or wrong in my own life. I am forever in your debt for this.

Also, perhaps now that this app has been denied, we will have room for more apps that simulate farts. The choices are so limited at this point, I can't find one that I like.

[Luppin]

The approval process can never be done away with unless the app store itself is done away with, because without it you'd see TONS of more useless/buggy apps flooding the app store.

[mdc929]

the approval process doesnt need to go away its just needs to be less strict
wayy less strict.
without double standards

[tknapp2]

Wow, how about a section labeled "clearly inappropriate" Apple could then throw all there junk in there. To allow baby shaking, but not make fun of politcal figures. You're right apple, I think makign fun of political figures would be more detrimental to myself and others.

[djshway]

People get to offended easily now-a-days... It's like the world has lost it sense of humor

[eballesq]

The ridiculousness of all of this is that any iPhone user can utilize their Safari browser to find all the "objectionable" content they can stomach.

Apple doesn't need to "endorse" every App -- the App Store is a warehouse.

Stop the nonsense.

[safinator]

bring the app to cydia, like google did with theirs.

[billchase2]

That's too bad. They've got some funny stuff...

Lighten up, Apple!

[smuggler]

who visits the app store anymore? issues like this keep me from shopping the app store

[knguyen]

who visits the app store anymore? issues like this keep me from shopping the app store

seriously. I'm sure most of us replaced the app store with **********.

Apple, you suck


woah what the F. they hashes out in- stall -- lous? hahaha

[rwin84]

So, lemme get this straight... Pornstar apps are approved but satirical ecards are bad juju??? Hmm sounds like crap to me.

[dale1v]

The ridiculousness of all of this is that any iPhone user can utilize their Safari browser to find all the "objectionable" content they can stomach.

Apple doesn't need to "endorse" every App -- the App Store is a warehouse.

Stop the nonsense.

What? It shouldn't need explaining that:

• The internet isn't STORED on Safari; it is merely accessed by it. If objectionable content was actually IN the browser's coding and Apple's website, you'd have a point, BUT...
• The Internet doesn't belong to Apple, so it is blatantly impossible for them to control its content outside of their domain
• The Apple AppStore is Apple's warehouse, so they can say what goes in it. Let's say you have a warehouse. Does this mean I can fill it with all sorts crap without your permission just because it's a warehouse?

Come on now...

seriously. I'm sure most of us replaced the app store with **********.

Apple, you suck


woah what the F. they hashes out in- stall -- lous? hahaha

pffffsh...the app for skanks that you're referring to isn't a just a substitute for AppStore, it's a way to steal candy-priced apps from it. And it's off-topic.

[Kyle Matthews]

Yah Dale - except Apple has even denied a few Twitter clients (which they later approved), saying there were inappropriate materials they were accessing (i.e. People's statuses). Lame.

And knguyen - dang right we block that out. We don't advocate cheap people stealing legitimate work. That's low.

[cyrusrayne]

I've read tons of times that the criteria for Apple rejecting an app can be entirely arbitrary, which at best is a major annoyance for users and developers.

Hell, these reports even date back to the app store's early days. Not that I'm trying to paint Apple in a negative light, but they aren't necessarily letting this reflect well on them at all.

[clive.weller]

I have worked in a factory all my life (50years) and heard all the jokes, all the songs, all the bad language and seen all the books and magazines. I really do not not need Appple or anyone else telling me what I should or should not see or hear. Surely I can make up my own mind.

[aglitch]

Once again... Apple epic fails.