Might as well ask why they don't censor Safari. e.g. Craigslist apps get booted unless they block "adult content" (as if we weren't adults), yet the very same content can be accessed with Safari.
Instead of banning apps with "adult content" while selling apps in which people butcher each other like in all the FPS games, how about just rating apps and having default settings for the AppStore where certain apps are hidden until you enable certain categories?
I understand that Apple wants to manage its brand, but if they prevent sideloading of apps and combine that with censorship, then in an increasingly electronic world that means a private entity does to us what we don't allow the government to do, even though government is elected by us, but we have no influence over Apple's decisions.
In the iOS market, AppStore has a monopoly position, and thus should be open to all until such point at which there are alternatives to the AppStore.
Apple could license its technology and automate API scanning and app signing, such that third parties can sell what Apple doesn't see fit to sell under its own brand.
Twitter and its ilk have the potential to demonstrate offensive content, but the app was not created with offensive content in mind. Where apps that are rejected on those grounds have that content as part of the app itself. So a porn themed app would be rejected but Safari wouldn't be even though you could view porn though it. Of course everyone has different opinions and Apple may make a questionable decision here or there, but I think they are doing a good job overall especially considering the amount of apps they have to review. That's why I don't slam them every time they make a mistake. They are not perfect, and like religion and politics, people can get very passionate around censorship. For some it is an all or nothing point of view, but for me there are degrees. I would rather they do what they are doing, but others may think otherwise. In the end it is their App Store, unless Cuban buys them out.
Apple censors apps that CONTAIN objectionable content, not that can be used to GENERATE objectionable content. By Cuban's rationale Apple should censor Word, Pages, and all other word processors because of all the objectionable content that have been created on them. Same thing with drawing apps. The guy wouldn't know an apt analogy if it hit in his smug face. He should go back to Cuba. ;-)
Well then... If we can't shut down the Internet, maybe something less drastic like banning computers for creating all that content, or maybe just cutting everyone's fingers off. No more typing, no more content!! Bravo!
Mark Cuban reminds me of Michael Dell. You look at where they are and just scratch your head in amazement.
Then you realize that their greatest asset is just dumb luck.
Comments are spot on; the Twitter app does not create nor contain objectionable material. That you can find and display objectionable material using the app is true of most internet applications. Twitter provides content filtering/blocking.
Either Cubans's just another apple hater with blind rage which further dulls his already clouded reason, or he recognizes the difference and is just being an ass... (which is more likely the case)
There are some seriously irony impaired people out there. Cuban is picking a ridiculous example to highlight the problems with Apple's policy. He's saying "You've gotta be consistent. And since you obviously can't ban Twitter, maybe you should back off on the rest of it." I'm not saying he's right or wrong... but that's his message, people.
It's not just any internet connected apps that have horrific content and content creating apps that can make horrific content but my calculator app should have a block being able to enter or calculate 58008 as this is clearly filth in the wrong hands. Apple should ban these immediately. /s
This is dumb. Treat Twitter like a web browser. You can use Twitter without find objectionable items. You can also block trolls.
Obviously. Twitter itself doesn't actually have any content. It's a platform to access content, exactly like a web browser. Or YouTube. Or any other number of platforms that allow for access to other content but don't actually contain content themselves.
It's a totally different situation from, say, a game.
Cuban's never struck me as the brightest bulb in the lamp, to be frank.
I had my doubts about him specially watching him on Shark Tank, this proves he is idiot, yep censor someone or the platform they use because you disagree with what they say. He is no better than those college student who want topic which they do no agree with not to be taught in classes or they have to provide warns that topics which maybe objectionable the teacher must post warns about. I did not realize we live in a society which peoples feels are so easily offend.
BTW I do not use tweeter since I am not interest in the microbloging rambling of people I do not care about. I recommend some people in this world should also self censor.
There are some seriously irony impaired people out there. Cuban is picking a ridiculous example to highlight the problems with Apple's policy. He's saying "You've gotta be consistent. And since you obviously can't ban Twitter, maybe you should back off on the rest of it." I'm not saying he's right or wrong... but that's his message, people.
I think most of the responders understood that Cuban was asking for consistency. However YOU seemed to have missed THEIR point: there is a difference between an app that has objectionable content and one that could be used by someone to create their own objectionable content. Given that distinction, it is perfectly consistent to ban the former without banning the latter. They are simply different in their nature.
Comments
e.g. Craigslist apps get booted unless they block "adult content" (as if we weren't adults), yet the very same content can be accessed with Safari.
Instead of banning apps with "adult content" while selling apps in which people butcher each other like in all the FPS games, how about just rating apps and having default settings for the AppStore where certain apps are hidden until you enable certain categories?
I understand that Apple wants to manage its brand, but if they prevent sideloading of apps and combine that with censorship, then in an increasingly electronic world that means a private entity does to us what we don't allow the government to do, even though government is elected by us, but we have no influence over Apple's decisions.
In the iOS market, AppStore has a monopoly position, and thus should be open to all until such point at which there are alternatives to the AppStore.
Apple could license its technology and automate API scanning and app signing, such that third parties can sell what Apple doesn't see fit to sell under its own brand.
It's a totally different situation from, say, a game.
Cuban's never struck me as the brightest bulb in the lamp, to be frank.
I had my doubts about him specially watching him on Shark Tank, this proves he is idiot, yep censor someone or the platform they use because you disagree with what they say. He is no better than those college student who want topic which they do no agree with not to be taught in classes or they have to provide warns that topics which maybe objectionable the teacher must post warns about. I did not realize we live in a society which peoples feels are so easily offend.
BTW I do not use tweeter since I am not interest in the microbloging rambling of people I do not care about. I recommend some people in this world should also self censor.