Apple sticking to family-friendly video efforts to avoid offense from viewers

13»

Comments

  • Reply 41 of 48
    bb-15bb-15 Posts: 283member
    robbyx said:
    bb-15 said:
    davgreg said:
    The Hip-Hop audio they stream is more offensive than anything on HBO, Showtime or Netflix.

    Apple should get out of- and stay out of- content.
    A strawman argument. 
    - There is a difference between producing content and having a streaming platform which distributes content produced by other companies/studios. 
    - Apple Music right now is a streaming platform which distributes other company’s/studio’s music content. 
    - Apple TV has software which distributes video content produced by other companies/studios. 

    * What is new in this article is that Apple will be producing its own video content. 
    - That is the difference from all the other content Apple has distributed before. 
    - Apple will be making its own content and will become a movie / TV studio. 
    - To claim that content made by other companies is = to Apple creating content is a strawman. 
    It's not a straw man argument at all.  While you are correct that there is a big difference between producing and distributing, in the end Apple has still decided to allow violent, misogynistic, and homophobic music to be part of their platform, which seems incredibly hypocritical given all of their social justice causes and commitment to not produce violent and risque content.  We're not talking about third party apps available via Apple TV.  That's different, I agree.  But you're trying to give them an out when it comes to Apple Music and they don't deserve it.  Bottom line is, they know Apple Music would fail miserably if they stuck to their supposed principals and didn't allow hateful, violent, homophobic, and misogynist content on the service.  In the end they are free to produce whatever they want, but let's be real.  They are total hypocrites.
    This a silly argument on your part because it ignores the nature of internet distribution which is extensive. The major internet distributors make massive amounts of things available including some disturbing content. 
    The Apple Music app (and prior to that the iTunes Store) can distribute all popular music which can be purchased by the user.
    The TV app can distribute all popular movies purchased by the user.
    The Safari browser is open to the entire internet.
    And iOS and Apple TV are platforms that have apps from other companies such as the Prime movie/TV app from Amazon.
    Also, Safari allows for purchasing the movies listed from the Prime app on the Amazon website.
      
    ** But this is the important thing you cannot grasp. All the film studios who have made content so far (including on the Prime app) are not the Apple studio.
    The same is true that all these studios are not necessarily the same as the Amazon Studio which produces movie / TV content. 
    - For instance Amazon sells the 1978 movie “I Spit On Your Grave” (considered misogynistic, demonizing of men, brutal by many) and Amazon Studios has produced nothing similar.  
    According to your “thinking”, because Apple allows the listing and distribution of the 1978 “I Spit On Your Grave” (and directly sells the 2010 version which I haven’t seen), through Apple TV/iOS, this is somehow like Apple creating a film with the same brutality as the 1978 “I Spit On Your Grave”.     
    * Let’s apply your argument to Amazon. Is the Amazon studio being hypocritical because it doesn’t create films like the 1978 “I Spit On Your Grave”?
    Of course not. 

    * Distributing or making available another company’s content (like 1978’s “I Spit On Your Grave”) is not the same as Apple (through its own studio) creating its own content such as a film / TV series. Same goes for Amazon. 

    edited September 2018
  • Reply 42 of 48
    sirozha said:
    Better Call Saul is an example of how an amazing series can be done without sex or a lot of violence. 
    Have you forgotten how that show began? In the desert? That struck me as pretty violent.

    You're right, violence is not a fundamental theme of the show, but the persistent *threat* of it is. That's why the Mike character exists.

    I only mention this because it's relevant to how Apple proceeds. Even in a show that's not inherently violent, like Saul, the storyline benefits from the dangers facing the characters. Maybe Apple's approach would allow for such themes, but if not, a show like Saul would be ruined.

    "Last Man Standing" portrayed values and political views that were inconsistent with mine, but still managed to entertain and amuse me. The lead character's right-leaning tendencies are fundamental to the story. The show wouldn't be any good without the political bent. Maybe that's not the kind of "politics" Apple wants to exclude (we haven't yet seen Apple's shows so at this point we're just guessing), but if it is, Apple would again be limiting its market appeal based on a philosophical approach that may not really be necessary.
  • Reply 43 of 48

    Rayz2016 said:
    The Shawshank Redemption 
    What?! One of the key elements of the story is a guy being repeatedly beaten up and butt raped. Another guy is beaten into a wheelchair-bound vegetable. An ex-con hangs himself from the ceiling.

    You're right, one doesn't come away from the movie thinking "Wow, that was violent!" but the violence is fundamental to the story.

    This is relevant to how Apple proceeds. If the philosophy is just to avoid severed heads, then fine. If it's to avoid any portrayal of violence at all, it seems like maybe they're on the road to being just another Hallmark Channel.
  • Reply 44 of 48
    jbdragonjbdragon Posts: 2,246member
    If I want so-called clean content.  I can just watch free broadcast TV.  Things are different when you pay for a service like HBO.  You want to watch Adult content.   You can still pick what content to watch it not watch.  

    But to just make what is another Kid-friendly service?  That's fine I guess, but I won't pay money to get it.  I'd rather just pay for Disney.   Far more kid-friendly content.  
  • Reply 45 of 48
    dewmedewme Posts: 3,810member
    stsk said:
    1. Disney has shown, not just nipples, but, no shit, full-frontal nudity in one of their movies. a. What's the title of the movie. b. What's the name of the actress in question? 2. In the immortal (paraphrased) words of Robin WIlliams: "You have to remember that America was founded by the Puritans - people so uptight that even the Brits couldn't stand them and kicked them out."
    I’ve always been troubled that Donald Duck is not wearing pants. 
    xamax
  • Reply 46 of 48
    MacProMacPro Posts: 19,379member
    It's not as if GOT or WestWorld were successful ...  oh wait a minute ....


    edited September 2018
  • Reply 47 of 48
    xamaxxamax Posts: 135member
    PROGRAMMING is called that way because it Programs/brainwashes the viewers into accepting things and ways, adopting them.

    One can easily observe through the subliminally aggressive complaints against Apple not pushing gratuitous violence or sex down their viewers throats that many are brainwashed with it, addicted to it, need it, depend on it.

    Let Apple produced - not sold - material be sane, enlightened, healthy. Let it not convey miasmas, darkness and negativity that clusters in the brain.

    Just observe the damage that brain formatting behavior PROGRAMMING video-games has done to entire otherwise brilliant generations of youngsters, conditioning them to react to situations and problems with violence or just made them totally inept. I know many miserable youths that are completely opaque, clueless, passionless, no self-drive whatsoever, lost, from having lived their childhood inside the games virtual reality. They could have been so much more had they been allowed a proper childhood, not been given addiction machines to compensate for their parents busy-ness. 

    Have you ever observed that there are practically no movies or PROGRAMMING that’s not either insanely violent or generally negative, promoting the worst behaviors as normal and acceptable? You can see this PROGRAMMING even in the news - ever asked yourself why 99% of so called news is negative, almost no positive news whatsoever? And recently more than 50% of “news” is FAKE NEWS, from pushing events that never happened as true to pushing only one sided perspective of things, all coming from Agenda developed by Think Tanks, the kinds of which develop TV Series scripts. Watch the Robert DeNiro Dustin Hoffman excellent movie Wag The Dog to get it!

    I’m sorry to all the people out here that have accepted the incredibly stupid belief that sex and violence sells therefore it’s acceptable, you have lowered yourself to an obedient puppet, you have lost your way.

    People must unstick their heads from their own butts.

    Apple is doing an admirable thing, period. It’s standing up straight, not taking it up the derrière.

    I bet that Apple didn’t buy Time Warner Inc. because they’d have to obey the lords of the system who own Hollywood. Read how Hollywood was created.

    Apple/Tim Cook is doing this faithful to Steve Jobs spirit. This was talked through with him so many times, for so long. It is well thought out.

    PS: to those that say sex is part of life I say so is bee polinizing flowers (that’s sexual), so is revolutionary self-sustainable farming systems, so is the Tiny Living movement, so are brilliant things that happen in the world that are uplifting and inspiring. Get out of the sewer.
  • Reply 48 of 48
    xamax said:
    [...] And recently more than 50% of “news” is FAKE NEWS, from pushing events that never happened as true
    In case anyone who is not delusional and/or paranoid is reading this:

    I spent 20 years mixing sound for the local newscast of a major national network. I can tell you with absolute certainty that the assertion above, that news media report events that never happened, is complete, utter nonsense. It does not happen, period. Sometimes smaller news outlets get a detail wrong, but that's not the same thing as reporting fabricated stories. Smaller, niche outlets often lack the time, resources, and personnel to verify, vet, and analyze information before publishing it. Large organizations put a sober editor between the reporter and the public, and promote a culture of making sure getting right is more important than getting it first.

    Obviously there are web sites devoted to creating made-up stories to generate cash for their operators, but they're hardly the norm for most news consumers. They're sure as hell not "more than 50%" of what's available. Mainstream media is still the most reliable, with fake stories making up ZERO percent of their content.


    xamax said:
    [...] to pushing only one sided perspective of things
    There is a certain degree of this, but only in the case of stories that are clearly and obviously black-and-white. For example, a story about a politician stealing money from constituents doesn't have a second side. There is no "Yeah, but..."

    The two exceptions to all of what I've written above are Fox News and CNN. I think it's tragic what's happened to CNN, as they used to report news. Now they're just a political outrage outlet. Fox News was never anything else. Still, neither one invents events that never happened, they just spin real events to frame them for the market they want.
Sign In or Register to comment.