I don’t understand this piece by Mike Isaac and John Paczkowski, “Nudged by Apple, Twitter’s Porn Saga Ends in a Raw Deal for Vine”:
That gnarly porno found on Vine was all too easily surfaced in the
app, due in part to the nature of the service itself. Search a
hashtag keyword for sex, penis or what have you, and you’ll be
taken straight to the hardcore stuff. That’s not as easy to find
in, say, YouTube, which has a more mature engine for filtering out
objectionable content. Or even Tumblr (though Tumblr is also rated
17+ in the App Store).
The prudish Apple can deal with the fact that yes, we are human,
and yes, we watch porn (lots of it). And to some degree, it will
always exist across the Internet. It’s a fact of life. But what
Apple can’t deal with is said porn front and center, easily
discoverable for any and all to see. It’s why SnapChat has a 12+
rating, and why Vine doesn’t.
In other words, think of yourself as a teenager to Apple’s
repressed mother — you hide your porn under your mattress. You
don’t leave it out on the coffee table.
I don’t understand how Apple is being prudish or giving Vine a “raw deal” here. If pornographic content is easy to find on Vine — and Isaac and Paczkowski agree that it is — how is 17+ not the appropriate rating? If Apple removed Vine from the App Store, pending some sort of de-porn-ification on Vine’s back end (no pun intended), I could see that being called a “raw deal”, or prudishness/censorship on Apple’s part.
An adult rating for adult content. How is that not exactly how it should be?
★ Wednesday, 6 February 2013