or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Explicit content slipping through Apple's iTunes Radio profanity filters
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Explicit content slipping through Apple's iTunes Radio profanity filters - Page 2

post #41 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

Why are you asking Apple to be a parent to your child?

 

Good grief.  We aren't asking Apple to be a parent to our child.  We are parenting by actively choosing to use Apple's explicit music filter.  What we expect is THAT THE EXPLICIT MUSIC FILTER ACTUALLY WORK!

FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #42 of 67
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rob53 View Post
 

What's explicit anymore? George Carlin made news with his 7 explicit words that could never be said on TV yet I believe every single one of them is now used, at least on cable. Daytime TV uses several on them. Kids use them because their friends and family use them. I'm not condoning their use but it really isn't Apple's problem to regulate their use. There are a lot of people who say they don't swear but they still use offensive language and they are not stopped by any filter.

 

I think we can all agree on at least a few words should be classified as "explicit".  If you don't care what your kid hears- thats fine, just take explicit off.  I would hope that when my child is 13 year old that I don't want the risk of having F bombs dropped in songs. Of course, I'm sure the majority don't care (about anything- not just cursing).  Yes, 13 year olds hear F bombs all the time- it doesn't mean that I choose to promote the word.

 

Can we also agree that cursing it typically ignorant because you can't expand your vocabulary enough to create other adjectives, verbs, and noun (all of which an F bomb could be) ;)

 

 

There are actually multiple, inconsistent standards at work. As for the FCC, they only regulate indecency on broadcast stations before 10 p.m. After that, as far as the government is concerned NBC could do anything HBO can do. NBC and its affiliates, however, have their own standards based on what they think viewers and advertisers find acceptable: more permissive than what's allowed before 10 p.m., but not a lot more permissive.

 

Basic cable content is not regulated by the FCC at all. Again, they can do anything HBO can do if the law is all they have to worry about. However HBO is a premium subscription channel that doesn't answer to advertisers. Basic cable channels show lots of ads, so they have to be sensitive to what advertisers want to be associated with, as well as what they think the public wants. This results in a standard that's more permissive than broadcast TV but still stops short of F-bombs and frontal nudity even in TV-MA rated shows.

 

Premium cable like HBO is limited only by corporate standards and an interpretation of contemporary community standards that's intended to avoid liability for obscenity prosecutions in whatever the most conservative U.S. jurisdiction is. This is why even the "adult" shows on HBO/Cinemax have simulated sex or actual sex acts that are edited/obscured.

post #43 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

Again, you're using a very limited scope to make a declaration for everything. This comnversrtaion clearly shows that you, zoetmb and RedHotFuzz are putting your emotions before your critical thinking. Have you ever considered why these words get you so upset? Did you even read the page of outmoded curse words?

 

*needs eye roll emoticon*

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post

The worse part of all this is people thinking that using the specific, altered terms: N-word, C-Word, F-you, etc. in a nasty way somehow exempts them.

 

I certainly don't think (or do) that.

FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #44 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

 Yes, I would love to monitor my child all the time, but the reality is that isn't a reality.

But what if you could, and censor 'everything'? She might not be able to post your good write up, What would happen to mankind if only a percentage would grow up "without foul"? (for a lack of a better term, the English language is a wonderful thing, but alas, I often can't remember the word that describes my feeling 'just right')

Oh, can someone tell me what the "N-word" is? It can't be "No", or "Naughty", so perhaps "Nuke"?

Edit: ah, that "N-word" (thanks Sol)
Edited by PhilBoogie - 3/31/14 at 1:36pm
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
"Fibonacci: As easy as 1, 1, 2, 3..."
Reply
post #45 of 67
I wish guns, terrorism, war and such words were considered "not acceptable on TV at kid listening hours".

But apparently, consensual f*cking is still way worse than invading, pillaging, killing and other fun stuff.

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply

Social Capitalist, dreamer and wise enough to know I'm never going to grow up anyway... so not trying anymore.

 

http://m.ign.com/articles/2014/07/16/7-high-school-girls-are-kickstarting-their-awa...

Reply
post #46 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

Saw that monologue.  Very funny.

Except c*nt... that word can only be used once in a lifetime, and be prepared to sleep on the couch.  1smile.gif
Not for these chaps, I suspect 1wink.gif
Edited by paxman - 3/31/14 at 7:33pm
post #47 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

I'll disagree.  With the same inflection, one could call something "F*cking big" or "gargantuan" and get the same point across.  Now if someone were to say "F*cking gargantuan"- I don't see how that makes something sound any bigger or makes my ears perk up more.
The problem is that most cursers say "F*cking big" because they can't think of anything better to say.

I have an over-curser in my office.  Instead of hearing his point- I think "Man- can he say a sentence without cursing?"

The f-word is the most versatile word in the English language and should be celebrated, not shunned or denied.
post #48 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post

I certainly don't think (or do) that.

I wasn't saying you in particular do but I see it often, especially on this forum. The next time there is a product review note if someone writes something like "That's a piece of sh!t." or "What a piece of cr@p."

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #49 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by SolipsismX View Post


I wasn't saying you in particular do but I see it often, especially on this forum. The next time there is a product review note if someone writes something like "That's a piece of sh!t." or "What a piece of cr@p."


Yes, it happens all the time.  It's silly.  If your word of choice won't pass the forum filters (for a reason), pick another word.

FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #50 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by RedHotFuzz View Post


Yes, it happens all the time.  It's silly.  If your word of choice won't pass the forum filters (for a reason), pick another word.

Very few words don't pass the forum filters, and NINEtoFIVEmac is one of them (but for different reasons). Shit and crap clearly pass.

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply

"The real haunted empire?  It's the New York Times." ~SockRolid

"There is no rule that says the best phones must have the largest screen." ~RoundaboutNow

Reply
post #51 of 67
Strange... Usually it's easy to filter. The only song I've known to skip threw the "E" is Shame on you by Avicii. But really weird.
post #52 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andysol View Post

I'd love to hear how C*nt is used in a non-combative way. And by that I mean in general conversation- not simply talking about the word like I am.

Lisa Lampanelli at the William Shatner roast:
Quote:
TJ HOOKER...what a piece of crap that was, I tried to TiVo 'TJ Hooker' and my TiVo suggested I punch myself in the c*nt!
post #53 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by AppleInsider View Post

Conversely, it seems that the same issue also exists in reverse: Users turning off the filter, in order to allow explicit content to play, report continuing to hear censored tracks, rather than the original explicit language.

Pretty sure it doesn't say it won't also play the censored tracks in addition to the uncensored tracks..

post #54 of 67

Stop f*cking listening to hip-hop, rap and Cannibal Corpse people!

post #55 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by BestKeptSecret View Post
 

Stop f*cking listening to hip-hop, rap and Cannibal Corpse people!

 

How very Jobs-like of you.

 

'Just avoid listening to that type of music.'  :lol: 

post #56 of 67

I'm mostly disappointed that Apple has yet to implement an explicit-lyrics-only filter. you know, to disable all that boring music that has zero cursing in it.

post #57 of 67
wait for the federal probe and 800 million dollar fine and states district attorneys to pile on...
post #58 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacinScott View Post

I have to weigh in because this is the one major issue I've had with iTunes Match since day one. The root of the problem goes back to iTunes itself. The "Explicit" tag needs to be separate item that can be selected under View Options, similar to "Part of a Compilation".

In my experience, iTunes Match incorrectly censored most of the Explicit songs in the Hip-Hop/Rap genre. I think part of the problem is that you are not given the opportunity to select Explicit or Censored when iTunes makes a match. Almost all music ripped from CDs or purchased from Amazon are incorrectly matched to censored versions. Since I used iTunes Match to replace all of my lower nitrate songs with higher quality versions, I'm forced to re-rip from CD or re-purchase to fix the problem.

What I'd really like the ability to do is toggle between Explicit and Censored on the fly for music in my library in the same fashion that iTunes Radio offers (once it's fixed). I manage all the music on my kid's iPod Touches to sync to playlists that only include "approved" songs that I deem appropriate. I've even run into an issue before buying a song that wasn't labeled Explicit that contained a prominent use of the S-word. iTunes was kind enough to refund the purchase, but I find the whole process very cumbersome. I'd gladly pay a nominal fee to have access to both versions of a song when I make purchases - maybe $1.49 instead of $1.29.

I've also had an issue with a Guns n' Roses album incorrectly matching to a censored version but it's not as obvious when it happens to a Rock song as when it happens in Hip-Hop/Rap.

Until Apple offers a fix, I guess I'll continue providing feedback (Provide iTunes Feedback) and hope that enough people do the same until the issues are resolved.

I'm very happy with Apple censoring all the Hip-Hop/Rap genres. Wiping them from the face of the earth would be even better.
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
post #59 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacinScott View Post

I have to weigh in because this is the one major issue I've had with iTunes Match since day one. The root of the problem goes back to iTunes itself. The "Explicit" tag needs to be separate item that can be selected under View Options, similar to "Part of a Compilation".

In my experience, iTunes Match incorrectly censored most of the Explicit songs in the Hip-Hop/Rap genre. I think part of the problem is that you are not given the opportunity to select Explicit or Censored when iTunes makes a match.

 

I would love to see this ability as well, from the opposite angle.  I have music ripped from my CDs that would be deemed explicit.  Not being a fan of explicit lyrics personally, I'd love to tell iTunes Match to download the "clean" version for me instead.  That would be a fantastic family-friendly option.

FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
FEAR GOOGLE
Reply
post #60 of 67

I think providing an option would be the best solution. I'd definitely appreciate being able to load "clean" versions of songs on my kids' iPods. Provide the option for users to appropriately tag their music and offer the choice when making a match. The worst cases are the ones where the explicit lyric is not replaced by a alternate clean lyric but just muted. Either way, a problem that needs fixing.

In some cases, I'd even be willing to pay a minimum fee to have both versions (perhaps, $1.49 instead of $1.29). In fact, I never understood why bundling didn't become an option on iTunes. I can see the same thing for songs and music videos. I doubt music videos sell much these days with kids going to YouTube, but maybe if the cost to get the song AND video were only a slight upsell, consumers would opt to get both. 

post #61 of 67

I listen to many genres of music and have had issues with not only hip-hop/rap but also rock and metal genres incorrectly matching music. It's just more obvious with certain music than with others.

post #62 of 67
Let me rephrase that. Does anyone who has or had daughters think this song is okay for kids?

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

I think it's okay for 12 and above.    I certainly have less of a problem with that song, which is meant to be a joke and isn't hurtful to anyone than with a rapper who talks about "bitches and hoes".     But let's say it isn't okay for a 12-year-old.    Why does it need to be censored?    Why can't parents raise their kids so either 

a) they'd have no interest in that song   -or-

b) they'd tell their kid that they didn't want them listening to it (and the kid would actually obey).

 



Your first question made me think you don't have kids. Since you say otherwise, I can only imagine that you don't understand them. Your kids' interest in music is going to be 10% to do with your household and 90% due to school and friends. There's just no way around that.

Your second question is far more interesting. That is exactly the case in our household, but our kids are in the minority, and so are we, as parents. Most parents haven't a clue what their kids listen to, and the kids do whatever they want because the parents aren't diligent enough to keep up and follow through. Then they share with their friends, who share with their friends; eventually it lands in your family, and parents either notice or not. It sucks, but it's reality.

Quote:

Certainly, even 10-year-old girls know that boys are sexually attracted to them, even if they don't understand every aspect of what that physical attraction means.  



If you really believe this, then I feel very sad. Neither of my kids had a clue even about what "sexual attraction" meant at age 10, and I'm quite happy about that. I don't know where you live, but in our city that kind of young-age attitude happens mostly in the lower socioeconomic neighborhoods. In the more affluent schools you see almost nothing even around the edges until 12 or 13, and if you're lucky as we are, not until 14 or 15. And yeah, I mean just having a clue about what "sexual attraction" even is. Kids should be free to be kids, not worried about this stuff so early.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
post #63 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 View Post

Let me rephrase that. Does anyone who has or had daughters think this song is okay for kids?

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

I think it's okay for 12 and above.    I certainly have less of a problem with that song, which is meant to be a joke and isn't hurtful to anyone than with a rapper who talks about "bitches and hoes".     But let's say it isn't okay for a 12-year-old.    Why does it need to be censored?    Why can't parents raise their kids so either 

a) they'd have no interest in that song   -or-

b) they'd tell their kid that they didn't want them listening to it (and the kid would actually obey).

 



Your first question made me think you don't have kids. Since you say otherwise, I can only imagine that you don't understand them. Your kids' interest in music is going to be 10% to do with your household and 90% due to school and friends. There's just no way around that.

Your second question is far more interesting. That is exactly the case in our household, but our kids are in the minority, and so are we, as parents. Most parents haven't a clue what their kids listen to, and the kids do whatever they want because the parents aren't diligent enough to keep up and follow through. Then they share with their friends, who share with their friends; eventually it lands in your family, and parents either notice or not. It sucks, but it's reality.

Quote:

Certainly, even 10-year-old girls know that boys are sexually attracted to them, even if they don't understand every aspect of what that physical attraction means.  



If you really believe this, then I feel very sad. Neither of my kids had a clue even about what "sexual attraction" meant at age 10, and I'm quite happy about that. I don't know where you live, but in our city that kind of young-age attitude happens mostly in the lower socioeconomic neighborhoods. In the more affluent schools you see almost nothing even around the edges until 12 or 13, and if you're lucky as we are, not until 14 or 15. And yeah, I mean just having a clue about what "sexual attraction" even is. Kids should be free to be kids, not worried about this stuff so early.

Good post.
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
Post from mstone to Benjamin Frost - "Perhaps that explains your lack of mental capacity. If I was your brother, I probably would have repeatedly smashed the side of your head with a cricket bat."
Reply
post #64 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

I certainly have less of a problem with that song, which is meant to be a joke and isn't hurtful to anyone than with a rapper who talks about "bitches and hoes".



I should also mention: we can disagree on the meaning of this particular song, but if you think Macklemore doesn't have songs about "bitches and hoes", you need to go read some of his lyric sheets.

When kids have free run of music, they will gravitate toward popular musicians and bands. He is VERY popular right now, and trust me, if they're listening to one of his songs, they're listening to many (or all) of his songs.

I'm not big on censorship, because I feel like adults are adults, and they should for the most part have the freedom to listen to, watch, read or say, what they want. But kids are different. They need guidance, and way too much of their "guidance" is coming from assholes that write and perform music like this, which is ostensibly aimed at an older audience, but in reality is not.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
post #65 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Benjamin Frost View Post



Good post.


Thanks. Sometimes I wonder if anyone's listening. Good to know at least someone is! :-)
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
post #66 of 67
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blah64 View Post

Let me rephrase that. Does anyone who has or had daughters think this song is okay for kids?
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post
 

I think it's okay for 12 and above.    I certainly have less of a problem with that song, which is meant to be a joke and isn't hurtful to anyone than with a rapper who talks about "bitches and hoes".     But let's say it isn't okay for a 12-year-old.    Why does it need to be censored?    Why can't parents raise their kids so either 

a) they'd have no interest in that song   -or-

b) they'd tell their kid that they didn't want them listening to it (and the kid would actually obey).

 



Your first question made me think you don't have kids. Since you say otherwise, I can only imagine that you don't understand them. Your kids' interest in music is going to be 10% to do with your household and 90% due to school and friends. There's just no way around that.

Your second question is far more interesting. That is exactly the case in our household, but our kids are in the minority, and so are we, as parents. Most parents haven't a clue what their kids listen to, and the kids do whatever they want because the parents aren't diligent enough to keep up and follow through. Then they share with their friends, who share with their friends; eventually it lands in your family, and parents either notice or not. It sucks, but it's reality.
 
Quote:

Certainly, even 10-year-old girls know that boys are sexually attracted to them, even if they don't understand every aspect of what that physical attraction means.  



If you really believe this, then I feel very sad. Neither of my kids had a clue even about what "sexual attraction" meant at age 10, and I'm quite happy about that. I don't know where you live, but in our city that kind of young-age attitude happens mostly in the lower socioeconomic neighborhoods. In the more affluent schools you see almost nothing even around the edges until 12 or 13, and if you're lucky as we are, not until 14 or 15. And yeah, I mean just having a clue about what "sexual attraction" even is. Kids should be free to be kids, not worried about this stuff so early.

Now I think you're the one who's naive.   On the one hand, you say that kids' interest in music comes from peers.   But you don't think their peers talk about sex?    It's all around them.   Even on TV shows before the safe-harbor time of 10pm and even on shows that are considered family comedies, there is constant talk about sex.    And if they don't get it from those shows, they get it from watching Mylie Cyrus videos or whatever.  But that isn't what I said anyway.   What I said is that kids are aware of attraction.    Don't little girls act silly in front of little boys and vice-versa in ways that they don't do when they're just with members of their own sex?    That's awareness of gender differences.    

 

Everyone thinks their own kids aren't like the "other" kids and are sexually unaware.   That's absurd.   You think because you're white and middle- or upper-class that your kids aren't aware?    Ha ha ha.    

 

Haven't you ever heard about the two seven-year-olds sitting on the swings in the back yard?

Country kid:   I found a condom under the porch.

City kid:  What's a porch?

 

I would say in the case of my daughter, 50% of her musical influences came from me, 20% from listening to AOR and Public radio, 20% from her school (once they put on a play, she got very into Broadway show music) and 10% from her peers.  Once she got into high school it would be 0% from her school and 30% from her peers, who happened to have very diverse tastes in music.   They all listened to everything from 1920s jazz and blues to various genres of latin music, folk, pop, some classical, the rock canon, new age...just about everything.    She never listened to rap or hip hop, although I'm sure some of the other high school kids did (she attended a very small private high school) and she was never all that into punk. She was more into bands like 10,000 Maniacs and Edie Brickell.   

 

In the case of my 11-year-old granddaughter, it's 50% from her parents, mostly her mother, and 50% from her participation in music lessons, chorus, etc.     And what she listened to was very well controlled because she wasn't permitted to purchase her own music online and she only had an iPod, not a smartphone and she didn't have her own  computer until recently.   There's monitoring software installed so that her parents get to see every site she visits and every email she gets or writes.    I'm sure when she gets older she'll insist on privacy, but for now, that's the deal.

 

In the case of my about to be 5-year-old grandson, it's a subset on what he's heard in the house and the car.   He's still at the age where he listens to children's music, but he also loves the Beatles and he's (surprisingly for the age), very attracted to the heavier guitar solos.   His favorite Beatle songs are "I Saw Her Standing There", "Helter Skelter" and "Day Tripper", but also "Magical Mystery Tour", even though there's no guitar solo.    I keep threatening to teach him all the words to a long Dylan song (like "Just Like A Woman"), but he's not interested as yet.   

post #67 of 67
I was going to skip the response, because I don't believe personal stuff belongs on a public blog, but I'm going to try to be short and hope it doesn't come out as curt or rude.

Quote:
Originally Posted by zoetmb View Post

Now I think you're the one who's naive.   On the one hand, you say that kids' interest in music comes from peers.   But you don't think their peers talk about sex?



No.

In fact I know they didn't. Not at 12/13, let alone age 10.

It's all around them.


No it's not. You're projecting. Maybe for your kids, but not mine, nor most of their friends. Some of that is parenting, much of it is their nature.

Even on TV shows before the safe-harbor time of 10pm and even on shows that are considered family comedies, there is constant talk about sex.  And if they don't get it from those shows, they get it from watching Mylie Cyrus videos or whatever.  


Again, you're projecting based on your own family life. My kids don't watch any of that stuff, before or after 10pm. They're uninterested in TV - they don't watch it at all unless there's something special that we record for them. As parents we almost never watch it either; certainly not when they're around. Kids learn what they see around them. Fortunately, most of their friends are not interested in mass-media crap either. We are in an unusual school/crowd though, in that regard. I actually like some of Mylie Cyrus' stuff, my kids both think she's stupid.

But that isn't what I said anyway.   What I said is that kids are aware of attraction.    Don't little girls act silly in front of little boys and vice-versa in ways that they don't do when they're just with members of their own sex?    That's awareness of gender differences.  


No, what you said was: "Certainly, even 10-year-old girls know that boys are sexually attracted to them, even if they don't understand every aspect of what that physical attraction means."

I call bullshit on that. NONE of the 10-year old girls I knew (at that age) acted silly in the ways you're thinking in front of the boys (though I have seen it kick in with a few at maybe 13). For the most part they ignored the boys and did their own thing. If there was any discussion at all it was about how stupid the boys were. The boys certainly weren't sexually attracted to the girls at that age either, they were playing sports and doing their own thing. There was very little in the way of engagement between genders at that age, except when forced by teacher groupings, and yes, I spent many, many hours at school, so I saw firsthand until high school. By 13 that's another story for a few of the kids, but mine and their friends at that age still had absolutely no interest and not a lot in the way of even understanding any of what you're insinuating.

Look, so many parents are proud of their kids "growing up", and it comes out in their praise, language, body language, everything. I see young kids elsewhere around town dressed up pretending they're 5 years older than they really are. It's stupid. We've never encouraged that kind of premature growing up at all. In our lives, growing up mostly means taking more responsibility for themselves, not mimicking stupid adults. Kids should be kids, and not under pressure to "grow up" based on the ridiculous crap portrayed by TV and magazine covers.

Everyone thinks their own kids aren't like the "other" kids and are sexually unaware.   That's absurd.


I understand the point you're making here because it's common. Most people think their own shit doesn't stink, it's true. And many, if not most, parents are pretty clueless about their kids because they're too busy living their own lives. It appalls me, and I think it promotes some of what you're talking about. But, my kids never went to daycare, never even had a babysitter, had both parents totally involved in their daily lives and schools, are still engaged to this day and know virtually all their friends. What you're talking about does eventually happen, but you are grossly wrong about the age range among our kids' schools and our kids' peers, and frankly, I think you're off by quite a bit even in the general case.
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
No Matte == No Sale :-(
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: iPod + iTunes + AppleTV
AppleInsider › Forums › Mobile › iPod + iTunes + AppleTV › Explicit content slipping through Apple's iTunes Radio profanity filters