Discord reverses course on iOS blanket ban of NSFW content
Popular messaging and VoIP platform Discord last week retreated from plans to enact a blanket ban on NSFW servers accessed through its iOS app, a step the company claimed was an attempt to adhere to Apple's App Store guidelines.
Last week, Discord announced a set of restrictions that banned all users from accessing NSFW content on iOS.
The decision was met with blowback from both users and content creators who rely on the platform for revenue.
As noted by Gizmodo, Discord modified its stance on the matter in an about-face that was detailed in a support article last week. Instead of a blanket ban, the company is targeting servers dedicated to explicit pornographic content, including those "organized" around NSFW themes or where similar content is dominant. Further, channels categorized as NSFW are accessible, though users need to verify their age before entering.
A spokesperson for the company issued the following statement to Gizmodo:
Initially, Discord blamed the content ban on Apple's developer guidelines, saying the policy was put in place "to comply with Apple's policies." The company subsequently told The Verge that Apple was applying pressure to remove adult content from the app.
Last week, Discord announced a set of restrictions that banned all users from accessing NSFW content on iOS.
The decision was met with blowback from both users and content creators who rely on the platform for revenue.
As noted by Gizmodo, Discord modified its stance on the matter in an about-face that was detailed in a support article last week. Instead of a blanket ban, the company is targeting servers dedicated to explicit pornographic content, including those "organized" around NSFW themes or where similar content is dominant. Further, channels categorized as NSFW are accessible, though users need to verify their age before entering.
A spokesperson for the company issued the following statement to Gizmodo:
In a statement to AppleInsider, Discord's support team confirmed that the company is adding a new feature that allows servers to identify as NSFW. As for age-gating on iOS, members who want to join an NSFW server will need to opt in on an alternate platform, the company said.Our goal is always to keep Discord safe, especially for our younger users. Last week, we introduced additional controls to ensure minors will not be exposed to content that is inappropriate for them per App Store guidelines. We realize the community had many questions, and we wanted to clarify our position and which servers will or will not be affected. These updates are outlined in detail on our support articles for users and server owners. We will continue to work with server owners and our partners, and will notify all server owners letting them know which of their servers are impacted.
Initially, Discord blamed the content ban on Apple's developer guidelines, saying the policy was put in place "to comply with Apple's policies." The company subsequently told The Verge that Apple was applying pressure to remove adult content from the app.
Comments
trying to put Apple and it’s users in a handicapped bad light? Especially when you should have taken measures to protect the innocent and unsuspecting to begin with?
Get it together.
But perhaps for the benefit of the doubt, maybe this compromise;
You want to use a third party App Store, mod, payment system, repair, or parts? Have at it, but in doing so, you sever your device from the apple ecosystem. No apple support or services at all on the severed device. I’d propose that even the Secure Enclave on the device should no longer function. Then if they want an apple device their way they can have at it, but you’re on your own.
What’s wrong with having choice? By allowing a 3rd party store what does that take away from you? Odds are large companies will remain in the App Store just because a large number of users won’t bother with any other store. You seem to be for choice, but chose the option that limits choices!?
So as for choice, iOS users chose a platform that doesn’t come with all those issues. Developers who want access to those customers have to abide by the App Store’s standards, and customers can download and install with a higher level of confidence and lower level of risk. This actually benefits those developers by removing barriers to customer willingness to try their software. Forcing a break from the App Store will take away that choice.
Read the post right above. Breaking the App Store model will mean many developers stay out of it, and it will be difficult or impossible for iOS users to avoid them if they want those apps. Many of us want iPhones specifically because they work the way they do. To maintain an “I don’t like it therefore it should be forced to operate like Android” seems a bit shortsighted and self centered.
Jailbreaking is a thing. You could do it to your iPhone and load those Cidia’s apps. You can do it to your iPhone. Don’t come with your ridiculous suggestions that Apple should do it as a normal practice.
Same with Xbox, Sony, and Nintendo - who are they to decide what games work on the consoles they developed and sell to their users!
There is nothing illegal about Apple taking masures to limit NSFW content. Heck, in some localities not doing so could land Apple in trouble.
What does Android have to do with anything? Please tell me you aren't going to resort to ad hominem due to ineffective arguments.
It will mean no such thing. Imo, if Apple does eventually allow 3rd party backend processing the vast, vast, vast majority of apps will remain status quo using Apple's systems. It will be financially and logistically in their favor to do so. Only the largest devs would realistically be able to take advantage. As long as the App Store makes the devs money they'd stay put. I say this because anecdotal evidence suggests it's exactly what would happen. What anecdotal evidence you ask? Android. Android, which you mention derisively is the most likely analog for what would happen to iOS. It's obvious you have no idea how Android works. Vast majority of Android devs use Google's backend (all of them on the Play Store use it, just like all devs on iOS use Apple's currently). For access to alternate android app store and billing, a user would need to manually and purposely elect to sideload an app or app store. Those who choose to do so don't affect those who like going through Google. It would be the same circumstance on iOS imo.
I'd love to hear the thought process behind thinking devs would "stay out of it".
Currently, Facebook, Google and others are quite put out that participating in the app store will require them to ask users' permission first, before they track them and sell their data. You think that's not an incentive for those major and minor developers, whose business model is built on monetizing end-user data, to move out of the app store? You think they won't take the opportunity to go to a separate store platform, if doing so provides the option to stay on iOS devices without meeting Apple's basic privacy requirements? That's the whole reason they're currently clamoring to break the App Store with your BS narrative that the App Store is anti-competitive. They don't want the competition that the App Store creates! If they're successful, they'll gladly take away user choice to have the privacy protections built into iOS. Gladly.
Large devs with established infrastructure would probably be the only ones to use their own (already established) backend.
An alternate app store on iOS would produce the same results as alternate app stores on Android: fringe use with little to no uptake. Little to no uptake from devs and customers.