No one is defending the app, just the fact that some decide to get pissed about it. Maybe instead of just being pissed off, they could go and volunteer at a organization that promotes positive parenting.
It would go something like this: Wow, I can see that child abuse is still a issue in the world, based on this inappropriate game, and I feel strongly about it, so I had better get out there and pitch in."
Being pissed at Apple or the Developer just makes you feel like your doing something about the problem.
Having seen the effects of abuse, like a 20-day old baby come into the ED with its skull crushed and then dying shortly thereafter, a year old with severely burned feet after being dipped in a "hot bath", or a 4 year old with the mark of a hot clothes iron on her back, and many other incidents, I have to say that Apple did the right, if belated thing in pulling this app. Some topics are just not funny, at least if you have any sense of what is right and wrong, or what is in poor taste, or just plain disgusting. You can blather on and wax poetic for the days-of-yor, when men where men, women couldn't vote, and "coloreds" knew their place, but ultimately you are full of shit.
And where is ANY evidence whatsoever that suggests playing a computer game about shaking babies on a mobile phone would increase their likelihood of performing any of the sick acts you mentioned? Is Apple doing the "right, if belated thing" going to stop any of the acts you've seen or have any impact on the people that would perform them?
You seem to suggest that just because you have seen more of the effects of child abuse than the average person that you automatically have more insight into WHY these acts were performed, and that somehow relates to the games or entertainment that the abusers have enjoyed, otherwise why bring it up? Or perhaps you are suggesting that your insight into child abuse gives you a better judgement of why a game glorifying this abuse should not be played - perhaps the answer is to show everyone the same things you have seen and hope that they come to the same conclusion as you (no doubt they will), rather than strip them of any opportunity to make their own f-ing mind up and perhaps learn to adapt the same philosophies to other areas of their life?
I'm sick of the bullsheet constantly vomitted out by people who have no idea, suggesting that getting enjoyment out of killing in a computer game or stealing cars in a computer game or pretending you are a gnome and firing a bow and arrow off the back of a giant horse in a computer game, would actually make you more likely to want to do these things in real life. Most studies suggest games are most often played as an ESCAPE from real life, not practice for it. Its a tougher argument for watching porn, but for the most part the same thing can be said; you are not watching it to skill up on how to have secks, it is a fantastical escape from your normal life (and one that seems to be quite popular). The objectification of women in porn is not a positive thing, but surely porn would not be someone's only indicator on how they should treat women? I think the same methodology as above applies universally: rather than stripping people of choice, educate about what choices are more valuable for society than others and let people make their own mind up.
"Some topics are just not funny.." - Some topics are just not funny TO YOU. This game didn't appeal in the slightest to me either, but why should the title of funny be awarded by Apple, or by me, or by you for that matter?
And the worst thing about your whole post imo, "You can blather on and wax poetic for the days-of-yor, when men where men, women couldn't vote, and "coloreds" knew their place, but ultimately you are full of shit".... W T F are you F on about? How have you jumped from real life child abuse, to a game about infanticide, to people wanting to put down women and promote racism???????? Thats one big straw dinosaur you just created.
When I was in my early twenties, single and childless, I probably would have found the though of this game funny. Now, married with two young children the thought is of it is repulsive. Maturity and life experience changes my views.
I have a thought for a new game. Perhaps I should make a game were we club baby seals to death by shaking the iPhone. Seems to me that there are enough sickos out there that would like this kind of thing...
And where is ANY evidence whatsoever that suggests playing a computer game about shaking babies on a mobile phone would increase their likelihood of performing any of the sick acts you mentioned?
The same evidence that proves that dancing and Rock-n-Roll music is a sure sign you are league with the devil. Kevin Bacon is satan!
I think most real-life instances of babies killed by shaking occur due to ignorance of the fact that this is a real danger. And this really does happen. So I see this application as a public service--unlikely to inspire people to kill their babies in real life, but it could help educate people to the dangers of baby shaking. If a kid plays this game, he/she might realize they shouldn't shake their baby sibling, and they will grow up with this understanding. Hopefully the publicity given to this game will have some positive impact, but I think they should have just allowed the game to remain, since its practical potential benefit outweighs the damage of offended sensibilities to people who don't have to buy the app if they don't want to.
While censorship is bad, what some people here are forgetting is that publishing houses, which is what Apple has become with the app store, have the right to not publish what they think is in poor taste, or offensive.
It's too bad this app made it to the store, or we would never have heard of it.
The fact that society seems to be less likely to think that very offensive music or other content is ok is a sign of the times, and not necessarily a good sign.
There is such a thing as self restraint. That applies to publishers as well as to listeners and buyers of such content.
Is it really a good sign that "performers" have songs about killing police and raping women in a way that is approving? I don't think so, but it seems that as long as it makes money, it's fine.
Who the hell has any right to tell others what they can and can not do as long as they break no laws. Pulling this app is as unamerican as it gets. You don't have to like it, but you can't dictate to others what they choose for themselves. This is what a free democratic society is all about. if you censor this then censor everything stop Mezco from producing Living Dead Dolls, stop making horror movies like SAW or movies that show people eyes being plucked out while it oozes yellow goo. Just sad.
People stomping on the freedom of others makes me even sicker! You don't have to like it, that is what freedom is about.
I think you're a little confused on what censorship is... no one is saying that they can't distribute this game to anyone because of the content. However, Apple has a right to say, "we don't want to distribute your software in our store", just like your local grocery store can decline to carry "Hustler" magazine.
]I don't understand why you would think that, I think you completely misunderstand the concept of a hate crime. Besides, what "game" has resulted in a jailing of the maker that you are aware of?
Jeff, I assume since you don't have the social awareness to sense when a certain amount of sarcasm is being used, you are probably okay with this game?
Personally I like dark humor, however when a society gets to the point where it becomes funny to simulate the killing of babies, it has a serious problem.
Apparently teckstud thinks this is all a big joke and an opportunity for lazy snark, so shouldn't we all join in condemning him for being objectively pro-baby killing?
Slingbox is an extremely high profile app with specific issues regarding bandwidth and Apple's corporate strategies around video streaming.
Baby Shaker is yet another stupid little time waster of the sort that Apple's app vetters must see 100 times a day.
I realize it makes an almost irresistibly easy shot, but the comparison actually makes no sense.
I'm not saying that the app vetting process doesn't have real issues, and needs more transparent and consistent standards. But those issues and standards aren't what keeps Slingbox off the app store while allowing Yet Another Stupid App on.
I hear what you're saying but I think you oversimplified my answer...
My point is that an app that may cost Apple or ATT money/bandwidth is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
While an app where you snap the spines of children didnt raise any flags...
Slingbox is an extremely high profile app with specific issues regarding bandwidth and Apple's corporate strategies around video streaming.
Baby Shaker is yet another stupid little time waster of the sort that Apple's app vetters must see 100 times a day.
I realize it makes an almost irresistibly easy shot, but the comparison actually makes no sense.
I'm not saying that the app vetting process doesn't have real issues, and needs more transparent and consistent standards. But those issues and standards aren't what keeps Slingbox off the app store while allowing Yet Another Stupid App on.
So then what are the issues and standards that allow the Baby Shaker App? If Apple's app vetters are so desperate to come up with 1billion apps downloaded and let this go through, then that is reprehensible.
BTW - what is so fantastic about 1 billion app when most are crap apps? This 1billion apps downloaded reminds me of McDonald's over 1billion served- like WGaF?
Since this has happened in REAL LIFE in which babies have been shaken to death, it is NO JOKE, you xxxxxx xxxx! I guess you would feel different if your baby was killed in the same manner, then maybe you might have a clue. This has never been portrayed as humorous, as Virgil tried to claim in his post. He is full of shit, as others have pointed out.
But yet no vitriol over the plenty of games that depict the murdering of adults? What age is it ok to pretend to kill people in a game?
By the way, I have a baby, and I don't like this app, but I don't see the reason to get angry about it. If they used my baby's picture in the app, I'd only be angry that they didn't ask permission. Do you really think the author's have ill will toward babies? Do you think this is promoting shaking babies? I can see how you would be angry about that, but let's use a little common sense here. There's no way that this will have any effect on people shaking babies.
The silver lining in this "controversy" is that it has inadvertently brought more awareness to the problem. Isn't that a good thing? Dark humor has a tendency to do that, despite people who don't understand it and decide to get angry about it anyway.
I hear what you're saying but I think you oversimplified my answer...
My point is that an app that may cost Apple or ATT money/bandwidth is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
While an app where you snap the spines of children didnt raise any flags...
Just pointing out the warped and selfish mindset.
I don't think you have to ascribe it to a "warped and selfish mindset."
Obviously, marquee apps or apps that have major interactions with the network or serious interactions with Apple's business partners are going to get looked at more closely than every random fart app or flashlight app.
The fact that the particular app in question happened to be in extremely poor taste doesn't change that dynamic.
Apple employs people to vet apps. We already hear a lot of bitching about the lag time, they have every incentive to plow through the reams of dumb little apps that don't do much of anything as quickly as possible. Things like VoIP clients or streaming video apps or GPS utilizing apps raise technical issues that are going to get the approval process kicked up to the next level, so that engineering people can weigh in on system impact.
It's not like Steve Jobs declared killing babies to be hilarious, or Apple employs a Director of Moral Standards to watch over each and every submission. And, Apple pulled the app as soon as it was brought to their attention. At this point, I would dare say that whichever employee originally OKed the app is gone or demoted or pretty harshly dressed down.
Don't let that stop you though. Apple equal baby killers, and worse, intend to profit from it. They are objectively monsters.
I support Apple pulling this app as it is their prerogative to set standards for what apps they will distribute and what they deem inappropriate.
That is really what it comes down to. This isn't a freedom of speech issue, it's an issue of what Apple is willing to allow for sale on the App Store. They are free to set terms and limitations however they want.
Wow.....simply wow. The douchebaggery of your post goes beyond the pale and really equates to the big steaming pile my dog just left in the yard. The only difference is your post smells worse and the dog meant no harm.
That was classy!
I was simply making a point based on something in the article at the start of this thread...
Quote:
Determining where to draw the line is a difficult business. At the company's annual shareholder meeting this spring, one conservative group sent a representative to voice outrage over the availability of TV programming in iTunes that they found objectionable, despite the fact that the shows they complained about are publicly broadcast over the air in the US, that their production has nothing to do with Apple, and that Apple provides parental controls in its products to allow families to limit what content their children access.
Adding a rating system for mobile apps, even a voluntary one where developers set their own audience rating, could pacify the concerns of both conservative groups and those who want to sell adult content to a specialized audience.
Bolding is mine.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigdaddyp
You do realize that people can be conservative and libertarian? Or just because someone is religious or a conservative does not mean they are anti gay? Right? You need to stop trolling with such baseless and derogatory crap.
Comments
I have a pre-game system handheld ... that shows babies being dropped from a burning building. The object is to catch them. ...
I believe that's Fire Rescue from Casio:
People defending this horrid app make me sick.
No one is defending the app, just the fact that some decide to get pissed about it. Maybe instead of just being pissed off, they could go and volunteer at a organization that promotes positive parenting.
It would go something like this: Wow, I can see that child abuse is still a issue in the world, based on this inappropriate game, and I feel strongly about it, so I had better get out there and pitch in."
Being pissed at Apple or the Developer just makes you feel like your doing something about the problem.
###
Having seen the effects of abuse, like a 20-day old baby come into the ED with its skull crushed and then dying shortly thereafter, a year old with severely burned feet after being dipped in a "hot bath", or a 4 year old with the mark of a hot clothes iron on her back, and many other incidents, I have to say that Apple did the right, if belated thing in pulling this app. Some topics are just not funny, at least if you have any sense of what is right and wrong, or what is in poor taste, or just plain disgusting. You can blather on and wax poetic for the days-of-yor, when men where men, women couldn't vote, and "coloreds" knew their place, but ultimately you are full of shit.
And where is ANY evidence whatsoever that suggests playing a computer game about shaking babies on a mobile phone would increase their likelihood of performing any of the sick acts you mentioned? Is Apple doing the "right, if belated thing" going to stop any of the acts you've seen or have any impact on the people that would perform them?
You seem to suggest that just because you have seen more of the effects of child abuse than the average person that you automatically have more insight into WHY these acts were performed, and that somehow relates to the games or entertainment that the abusers have enjoyed, otherwise why bring it up? Or perhaps you are suggesting that your insight into child abuse gives you a better judgement of why a game glorifying this abuse should not be played - perhaps the answer is to show everyone the same things you have seen and hope that they come to the same conclusion as you (no doubt they will), rather than strip them of any opportunity to make their own f-ing mind up and perhaps learn to adapt the same philosophies to other areas of their life?
I'm sick of the bullsheet constantly vomitted out by people who have no idea, suggesting that getting enjoyment out of killing in a computer game or stealing cars in a computer game or pretending you are a gnome and firing a bow and arrow off the back of a giant horse in a computer game, would actually make you more likely to want to do these things in real life. Most studies suggest games are most often played as an ESCAPE from real life, not practice for it. Its a tougher argument for watching porn, but for the most part the same thing can be said; you are not watching it to skill up on how to have secks, it is a fantastical escape from your normal life (and one that seems to be quite popular). The objectification of women in porn is not a positive thing, but surely porn would not be someone's only indicator on how they should treat women? I think the same methodology as above applies universally: rather than stripping people of choice, educate about what choices are more valuable for society than others and let people make their own mind up.
"Some topics are just not funny.." - Some topics are just not funny TO YOU. This game didn't appeal in the slightest to me either, but why should the title of funny be awarded by Apple, or by me, or by you for that matter?
And the worst thing about your whole post imo, "You can blather on and wax poetic for the days-of-yor, when men where men, women couldn't vote, and "coloreds" knew their place, but ultimately you are full of shit".... W T F are you F on about? How have you jumped from real life child abuse, to a game about infanticide, to people wanting to put down women and promote racism???????? Thats one big straw dinosaur you just created.
I have a thought for a new game. Perhaps I should make a game were we club baby seals to death by shaking the iPhone. Seems to me that there are enough sickos out there that would like this kind of thing...
How many babies killed?
And where is ANY evidence whatsoever that suggests playing a computer game about shaking babies on a mobile phone would increase their likelihood of performing any of the sick acts you mentioned?
The same evidence that proves that dancing and Rock-n-Roll music is a sure sign you are league with the devil. Kevin Bacon is satan!
The same evidence that proves that dancing and Rock-n-Roll music is a sure sign you are league with the devil. Kevin Bacon is satan!
Well Alice Cooper did sing "Dead Babies".
It's too bad this app made it to the store, or we would never have heard of it.
The fact that society seems to be less likely to think that very offensive music or other content is ok is a sign of the times, and not necessarily a good sign.
There is such a thing as self restraint. That applies to publishers as well as to listeners and buyers of such content.
Is it really a good sign that "performers" have songs about killing police and raping women in a way that is approving? I don't think so, but it seems that as long as it makes money, it's fine.
It's not.
Who the hell has any right to tell others what they can and can not do as long as they break no laws. Pulling this app is as unamerican as it gets. You don't have to like it, but you can't dictate to others what they choose for themselves. This is what a free democratic society is all about. if you censor this then censor everything stop Mezco from producing Living Dead Dolls, stop making horror movies like SAW or movies that show people eyes being plucked out while it oozes yellow goo. Just sad.
People stomping on the freedom of others makes me even sicker! You don't have to like it, that is what freedom is about.
I think you're a little confused on what censorship is... no one is saying that they can't distribute this game to anyone because of the content. However, Apple has a right to say, "we don't want to distribute your software in our store", just like your local grocery store can decline to carry "Hustler" magazine.
]I don't understand why you would think that, I think you completely misunderstand the concept of a hate crime. Besides, what "game" has resulted in a jailing of the maker that you are aware of?
Jeff, I assume since you don't have the social awareness to sense when a certain amount of sarcasm is being used, you are probably okay with this game?
Personally I like dark humor, however when a society gets to the point where it becomes funny to simulate the killing of babies, it has a serious problem.
One billion Apps sold-
How many babies killed?
Apparently teckstud thinks this is all a big joke and an opportunity for lazy snark, so shouldn't we all join in condemning him for being objectively pro-baby killing?
Won't someone think of the children?
Won't someone think of the children?
To think of the children also includes thinking of Teckstud.
To think of the children also includes thinking of Teckstud.
Well I am childlike as opposed to you being childish.
Slingbox is an extremely high profile app with specific issues regarding bandwidth and Apple's corporate strategies around video streaming.
Baby Shaker is yet another stupid little time waster of the sort that Apple's app vetters must see 100 times a day.
I realize it makes an almost irresistibly easy shot, but the comparison actually makes no sense.
I'm not saying that the app vetting process doesn't have real issues, and needs more transparent and consistent standards. But those issues and standards aren't what keeps Slingbox off the app store while allowing Yet Another Stupid App on.
I hear what you're saying but I think you oversimplified my answer...
My point is that an app that may cost Apple or ATT money/bandwidth is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
While an app where you snap the spines of children didnt raise any flags...
Just pointing out the warped and selfish mindset.
Slingbox is an extremely high profile app with specific issues regarding bandwidth and Apple's corporate strategies around video streaming.
Baby Shaker is yet another stupid little time waster of the sort that Apple's app vetters must see 100 times a day.
I realize it makes an almost irresistibly easy shot, but the comparison actually makes no sense.
I'm not saying that the app vetting process doesn't have real issues, and needs more transparent and consistent standards. But those issues and standards aren't what keeps Slingbox off the app store while allowing Yet Another Stupid App on.
So then what are the issues and standards that allow the Baby Shaker App? If Apple's app vetters are so desperate to come up with 1billion apps downloaded and let this go through, then that is reprehensible.
BTW - what is so fantastic about 1 billion app when most are crap apps? This 1billion apps downloaded reminds me of McDonald's over 1billion served- like WGaF?
Since this has happened in REAL LIFE in which babies have been shaken to death, it is NO JOKE, you xxxxxx xxxx! I guess you would feel different if your baby was killed in the same manner, then maybe you might have a clue. This has never been portrayed as humorous, as Virgil tried to claim in his post. He is full of shit, as others have pointed out.
But yet no vitriol over the plenty of games that depict the murdering of adults? What age is it ok to pretend to kill people in a game?
By the way, I have a baby, and I don't like this app, but I don't see the reason to get angry about it. If they used my baby's picture in the app, I'd only be angry that they didn't ask permission. Do you really think the author's have ill will toward babies? Do you think this is promoting shaking babies? I can see how you would be angry about that, but let's use a little common sense here. There's no way that this will have any effect on people shaking babies.
The silver lining in this "controversy" is that it has inadvertently brought more awareness to the problem. Isn't that a good thing? Dark humor has a tendency to do that, despite people who don't understand it and decide to get angry about it anyway.
I hear what you're saying but I think you oversimplified my answer...
My point is that an app that may cost Apple or ATT money/bandwidth is gone over with a fine tooth comb.
While an app where you snap the spines of children didnt raise any flags...
Just pointing out the warped and selfish mindset.
I don't think you have to ascribe it to a "warped and selfish mindset."
Obviously, marquee apps or apps that have major interactions with the network or serious interactions with Apple's business partners are going to get looked at more closely than every random fart app or flashlight app.
The fact that the particular app in question happened to be in extremely poor taste doesn't change that dynamic.
Apple employs people to vet apps. We already hear a lot of bitching about the lag time, they have every incentive to plow through the reams of dumb little apps that don't do much of anything as quickly as possible. Things like VoIP clients or streaming video apps or GPS utilizing apps raise technical issues that are going to get the approval process kicked up to the next level, so that engineering people can weigh in on system impact.
It's not like Steve Jobs declared killing babies to be hilarious, or Apple employs a Director of Moral Standards to watch over each and every submission. And, Apple pulled the app as soon as it was brought to their attention. At this point, I would dare say that whichever employee originally OKed the app is gone or demoted or pretty harshly dressed down.
Don't let that stop you though. Apple equal baby killers, and worse, intend to profit from it. They are objectively monsters.
I support Apple pulling this app as it is their prerogative to set standards for what apps they will distribute and what they deem inappropriate.
That is really what it comes down to. This isn't a freedom of speech issue, it's an issue of what Apple is willing to allow for sale on the App Store. They are free to set terms and limitations however they want.
Wow.....simply wow. The douchebaggery of your post goes beyond the pale and really equates to the big steaming pile my dog just left in the yard. The only difference is your post smells worse and the dog meant no harm.
That was classy!
I was simply making a point based on something in the article at the start of this thread...
Determining where to draw the line is a difficult business. At the company's annual shareholder meeting this spring, one conservative group sent a representative to voice outrage over the availability of TV programming in iTunes that they found objectionable, despite the fact that the shows they complained about are publicly broadcast over the air in the US, that their production has nothing to do with Apple, and that Apple provides parental controls in its products to allow families to limit what content their children access.
Adding a rating system for mobile apps, even a voluntary one where developers set their own audience rating, could pacify the concerns of both conservative groups and those who want to sell adult content to a specialized audience.
Bolding is mine.
You do realize that people can be conservative and libertarian? Or just because someone is religious or a conservative does not mean they are anti gay? Right? You need to stop trolling with such baseless and derogatory crap.
Oh, silly me for thinking that Conservatives are anti-gay. Where on earth did I ever get that idea!