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.
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
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.
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"?
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.
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."
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.
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..
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Comments
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.
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*
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.
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)
But apparently, consensual f*cking is still way worse than invading, pillaging, killing and other fun stuff.
[VIDEO]
The f-word is the most versatile word in the English language and should be celebrated, not shunned or denied.
[VIDEO]
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."
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.
Very few words don't pass the forum filters, and NINEtoFIVEmac is one of them (but for different reasons). Shit and crap clearly pass.
Lisa Lampanelli at the William Shatner roast:
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..
Stop f*cking listening to hip-hop, rap and Cannibal Corpse people!
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.'
" src="http://forums-files.appleinsider.com/images/smilies//lol.gif" />
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.