Apple Bans Game App That Criticizes Smartphone Production 213
An anonymous reader sends word that Apple has removed from the App Store a game called Phone Story, which walks players through the creation of a smartphone, highlighting many of the negative aspects. There are four brief stages: running a mining facility in the Congo, saving suicidal factory workers, handing out phones to oblivious consumers, and generating e-waste through planned obsolescence. Apple said Phone Story violated sections 15.2, 16.1, 21.1, and 21.2 of the App Store guidelines, which make reference to "objectionable or crude content" and "offensive or mean-spirited commentary." A short video of the game has been posted at Kotaku.
Why am I so surprised :) (Score:5, Funny)
apple has always been acting very nice to criticism so far, never threatening to sue commentaries it did not like... this is so out of character :)
Re:Why am I so surprised :) (Score:5, Insightful)
Hark! I hear now many rushing to justify Apple, by quoting other worse companies, or such by ingenious logical methods as to perplex lesser men entirely. Surely, this is simply another reason that Apple is the great organization that it is!
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Who says it's a justification of Apple to point out that they get singled out in this sort of thing.
1) Person A is doing bad things!
2) Well, Person B does identical things, perhaps you should criticise them too.
1) You're just trying to justify Person A's actions!
2) Err? I guess you could try and twist it that way. Am I not allowed to mention Person B's infractions at all when talking about this? Does mentioning them somehow make it look like I'm trying to give Person A a pass?
1) Whatever fanboi!
Re: (Score:3)
In the Android market (person B) it would have just been accepted and the authors of this game wouldn't have anything to publicly complain about in the media.
Re: (Score:3)
Well that's the point isn't it - despite doing the same things (apart from tighter control on the App Store, which is really the only difference), they're the same. Yet I've already seen it on this thread a few times: "this is what you get with Apple: censorship, third world slave labour and outsourcing!" in serious posts, as if every other mass market product in the world is made in the utopian ideal of well paid/well treated factory workers in local factories.
Point out the issues with globalisation and ca
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You can, of course, publish it as an HTML5 app on the iPhone - the method that predates the App Store and is still fully supported.
Re: (Score:2)
Google good, Apple bad. It's time for your two minutes of hate.
Re:Why am I so surprised :) (Score:5, Informative)
We are currently considering two steps:
* Produce a new version of Phone Story that depicts the violence and abuse of children involved in the electronic manufacturing supply chain in a non-crude and non-objectionable way.
* Release a version for the Android market and jailbroken ios devices.
From the publisher's website. http://phonestory.org/banned.html [phonestory.org]
Android phone made of hemp by ... (Score:2, Insightful)
We are currently considering ...
* Release a version for the Android market and jailbroken ios devices.
Yeah, cause Android phones are made from hemp by fair trade workers.
This is all just a publicity stunt, seems to be working quite well. Congrats to the developer no one had ever heard of.
Re: (Score:3)
A friend pointed out to me MIT Press published a book that discusses most of the games in a political context: Newsgames: Journalism at Play
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Simple Rules in business:
Don't tell Big Tobacco that smoking kills.
Don't tell Big Fast Food that their food is unhealthy.
Don't tell Big Pharma that they peddle snake oil pills driven to consumers by fear they (Big Pharma) create.
Apparently we can now add:
Don't tell Big Communications that their industry has any sort of faults or makes a buck off the backs of kids in poor-shit-hole-third-world countries.
Also in the agreement: 16.1 Apps that present excessively objectionable or crude content will be rejected
W
Seconded. (Score:2)
The actual violence and abuse of children is crude and objectionable. The contortions you'd have to go through to make it not be so would rob the app of any hope it ever had of making an impact.
Dr Obvious. (Score:2)
Yes, thank you for explaining their point for those without the two brain cells needed to work it out for themselves...
Re: (Score:3)
The one thing that could be said of Android is that Phone Story would be available whether Google listed it on Marketplace or not - the devs could host the .apk on their own site and people could download it if they wished.
Re: (Score:3)
He's suggesting such guidelines should not exist in the first place.
No win, really (Score:5, Interesting)
Allowing the application will reflect negatively on Apple just as much as censoring it (and not for reasons having to do with whether the criticism has substance). I can just imagine the headlines: "Apple is so dumb they will sell you the rope you can hang them with".
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Just like you have cop-assisted suicide, you also have apple-assisted Streisand effect.
If you think about it, producing controversial app that you know since day 1 of development to not pass review process, is extemely cheap way to get your name on title pages.
I bet app authors would be royally pissed if it actually passed review process and appeared in app store.
Re: (Score:3)
Actually, it did pass the review process. It was available on the app store for a couple of hours before Apple pulled it. Whoever reviewed it probably wasn't playing close attention.
Re: (Score:2)
I think blocking this gives the 'game' as well as Apple more press coverage than allowing it, so we have here a win/lose situation.
Re: (Score:2)
In my country, letting people express critiscism is not stupidity. It's call freedom of speech and it's something that some of us value (you know a little... like the ability to eat of breath)
So NO it's not a no-win situation. You evaluate this as if it was a PR problem, (which it is, for apple's fucking PR departement !) but for you it's not a PR problem, if you really dig this, just go work in PR, you appear to be cynical enough for it.
But don't think that the issue is in PR, the issu
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Allowing the app would have let apple owners (who possess a certain flair for cognitive dissonance) a chance to have fun on their i-device at the expense of apple's reputation (but let's face it, if you have an i-device you have already bought in and could care less about it). Instead, now we have a news story that transcends apple users and the whole world is hearing about not only the hilarious app, but apple's intent on censoring it. The net effect, I predict, will be that apple users will continue to
Re: (Score:2)
Would it really? Foxconn has been target of controversy for quite some time, but iPhones still sell very well.
By censoring this game, not only they triggered Streisand effect and brought the problems about iPhone production to attention just the same, but also made the iPhone look like a restrictive platform for developers once again.
Besides, do you really think iPhone buyers really actually care about it's production problems enough to not to buy them?
Censorship (Score:2)
And this [slashdot.org] wasn't also?
Face it, Apple deserves criticism when it messes up on its decided course to censor all executables for iOS. It is perfectly OK to criticize Apple for not having the balls to approve content which criticizes Apple --- and AFAIK this content wasn't even criticizing Apple directly (unlike the strawman examples you talk about), it was criticizing all smartphone production (and probably, by association, smartphone consumption).
If someone wants to worship ce
Re: (Score:2)
So Apple is deemed evil for removing a game treating worker suicides as grist for a clever post-modern parody of jaded consumerism? The "evil Foxconn drives its exploited workers into suicidal despair" meme is apparently now so entrenched its supposed truth is the stuff of games. Nasty Apple for choosing not to endorse a superficial falsehood presently crudely and for lucre.
Re: (Score:2)
And it would be perfectly valid if Apple had provided a user-authenticated way for users to install homebrew apps on their phones. Note "user-authenticated" is simple - remember an ITunes account is needed to activate your phone and install apps.
Right now, anyone who has my phone for a few moments can visit jailbreakme.com, jailbreak my phone and install whatever he wants to (including keylogger software).
Does Valve prevent you installing games on your PC?
XBox and PS3 are in the same boat as Apple.
(Just wo
Re: (Score:2)
Sam tired old drivel.
Why should they?
They make something and offer it for sale. You buy it or you don't.
You can also buy a developer subscription for the outrageous price of 59gbp or whatever it is in your local currency.
Then you can install your homebrew software to your hearts content. Your average consumer doesn't care. In fact they probably like it the way it is. Ignorance is bliss.
and no anti-slashdot on slashdot (Score:3)
i love it... an internet with no criticism, debate, or dissent.
Re: (Score:2)
What part of the narrative of this is isn't true ?
Could you , for the funlulz of it, define for me propaganda ? if you could use the word communist inside your definition it would totally make my day
And last but not the least how much are you paid to say something so stupid ?
How is censorship a good precedent ?
What kind of masochist sheep would think that ?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:No win, really (Score:5, Insightful)
If you censor criticism, you're not merely losing the moral high ground, you're also validating the criticism (after all, why would you censor something if it wasn't true?) as well as giving it publicity (see the Streisand effect.)
The correct thing to do is to face the criticism. If they are wrong, then you prove it (tour of the facilities maybe?). If they've unearthed something wrong, then you publicly apologize and fix that. Under no circumstances try to weasel out through semantic loopholes or by putting down straw men.
The game sounds brilliant (Score:2)
It needs to be ported to other platforms and renamed "this app is banned on the iphone".
Apple/Scientology? (Score:4, Interesting)
I've always jokingly called apple the "Cult of Macintology", but now it's even more obvious. The cult of $cientology sue people when they don't like what they're saying, Apple also take action (by the sole means they can) by killing off criticism.
Can anyone say Streisand effect?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I've always jokingly called apple the "Cult of Macintology", but now it's even more obvious. The cult of $cientology sue people when they don't like what they're saying, Apple also take action (by the sole means they can) by killing off criticism.
Can anyone say Streisand effect?
I'm not sure what your point is, but I'm not sure that a comparison between significant changes in their manufacturing due to direct criticism [wikipedia.org] versus pulling a retarded game from their own app store helps your point.
Re: (Score:2)
The point is that their rules are arbitrary - They allow some apps that violate their rules, and ban others, or in this case allow it through their rigorous evaluation procedure that all apps go through, leave it up for a couple of hours when anyone could download it, until someone pointed out it could refelct badly on them , and the they banned it ...
So apps like this can get through onto the apps store - their approval procedure is not up to much
If an it was an app that did not bother them how long would
Re: (Score:2)
Can anyone say Streisand effect?
Did you say something? I was too busy launching birds at pigs to care about that boring political bullshit.
Re: (Score:3)
No; they are prevented to by threat of lawsuit.
Re: (Score:2)
Can anyone say Streisand effect?
I sure can, I just posted to my failbook, and if history is any indication, at least one of my friends will pick it up and run with it. And if we all do it... well, you know. This is a great reason for more of us to run FB, twitter, etc. Just don't share anything personal and you're home free.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually in most religions the apostate is the most hated enemy. I believe in the Catholic church, speaking out contrary to official teachings is just about the only way to get excommunicated these days.
Point is, everyone hates a traitor.
Re: (Score:2)
Can anyone say echo chamber?
Giggles (Score:4, Funny)
Goes back on his Android.
Re: (Score:3)
Indeed, this sort of crap is precisely why I didn't get an iPhone.
Granted, there are downsides, but all in all I'd rather have to look out for myself than have somebody tell me I can't have an app because it makes them look bad.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Whooooooooooosh!
I think you missed the sarcasm. I'm not sure I could have bludgeoned you over the head any more firmly with it. I might have injured someone.
Re: (Score:2)
No, because there is nobody who can stop me from installing any app I want on my phone. Did you really miss the point, or were you trying to act smart by diverting the topic?
It fun to poke at Apple (Score:2, Insightful)
The Developer of the App knew they were going to get ban, it was obvious. Its like the child wanting to get up the parent skin just for the fun of it. It's no fun doing in on Android because they don't have guidelines. This is basically just to get attention. In reality most users like Apple's App review system, it get rid of the obvious garbage.
Re:It fun to poke at Apple (Score:4, Insightful)
...it get rid of the obvious garbage.
I'm in tears, here.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
lol yea sure it does
http://ifartmobile.com/ [ifartmobile.com]
there is a mission critical app that does not in any way constitute garbage
Re: (Score:2)
Hey, it's better than "Paul Blart: Mall Cop" and that cost $30 million dollars to make.
There's clearly a market for fart apps if someone read the script for that film and signed a cheque for that much.
Re: (Score:2)
It fun to out verb (Score:3, Funny)
It fun to out verb.
To, or not to. That the question.
Re: (Score:2)
*sigh* Have you spared a moment to consider whether the OP is a non-native English speaker?
Slashdot might be based in the US and thus be predominantly Anglo-centric but there are quite a few people on this Earth who aren't native English speakers. English could be this guy's 4th or 5th language for example.
I have no problem with the idea of poking fun at someone's language skills when they should know better (or indeed DO know better but are just being lazy) but assuming everyone speaks MY language at least
Re: (Score:2)
"Apple is just protecting us, their devoted users, from seeing things that we shouldn't see! They only do it out of the goodness of their hearts!"
Re: (Score:2)
streisand effect? (Score:2)
Would I ever heard anything from the game if Apply did not ban it from their phones?
Gosh, streisand effect much? (Score:3)
I don't have an iPhone as I am not a moral vacuum and so would never have heard of this app normally but now I have... good job Apple. See that they are not completely evil, they want to make sure everyone is properly informed of just what you stand for when you buy an iPhone. Censorship, outsourcing of all production work from the US and turning it into slave labor instead.
Samsung could at this point make Android phones with real kitten fur and still take the moral high ground... I didn't just give somebody an idea did I?
Alright all your Apple cultists, time for you to loudly protest that: vote with your dollars, doesn't apply when the shiny is shiny enough but we should boycot X Y and Z because they are not hip. Oh and claiming that it ain't censorship if it is a company doing it is also a good way to protest (and show that you have no spine).
Ready? GO!
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
Yeah, so much censorship, deciding what to carry in a privately owned store. They're still free to promote their app in other ways, on different devices. Hell, they can even make it an HTML5 app for the iPhone. Nothing at all stopping them doing that. What they can't do is sell it/give it away in the App Store, since that's Apple's decision. Subtle, but there it is.
I take it all Android phones are made in the US, right? Not made in the same factories as iPhones? Right?
Not that it makes outsourcing any bette
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, so much censorship, deciding what to carry in a privately owned store.
Ownership is irrelevant, it's still censorship by definition. It is less odious than government censorship, but still offensive.
Not that it makes outsourcing any better, but assuming any Android handsets *are* made in the same factories, the workers that make them are being paid less than the ones building iPhones sitting just across from them.
How do you know? Because Apple claims it is so?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I don't have an iPhone as I am not a moral vacuum and so would never have heard of this app normally but now I have... good job Apple. [...]
Alright all your Apple cultists, time for you to loudly protest that: vote with your dollars[...]
Ready? GO!
Does HTC fare any better in this regard? Is anyone higher rated by Greenepeace, EPA, etc, than Apple? Is there some magical bamboo and seaweed phone that is in the ballpark of an iPhone? Is there a better (and feasible) way to do this? Do tell.
Re: (Score:3)
Samsung also outsources some of its production. Some to China, some to India, some to other countries.
Is there a manufacturer left building phones or computers in the US? I don't know of one.
Is there a manufacturer left not doing some of its production in third-world countries?
Re: (Score:2)
There's nothing wrong with doing production in the third world.
The greatest favour you could do those countries is to take your business there, treat your staff properly, do your manufacturing and raw materials sourcing in an ethical and environmentally responsible way.
That's how to improve conditions for the people in those countries.
What's wrong, is to outsource parts of your business to those parts of the world, and adopt a "don't ask, don't tell" attitude to unethical practices.
FWIW I'd pay a £50
Like those Bible apps... (Score:3)
VERY mean-spirited towards Evil. Whole cities destroyed. But perhaps this falls under the Parody Rule.
Re: (Score:2)
God basically kills several millions people in the most atrocious fashions for over 1000 pages. I mean seriously there are 2,476,633 documented murders commited by god in the bible. That must be some kind of record for the numbers of kills in a story. And that doesn't even count Sodome and Gomorra and the Flood and the really big stuff for which there are no numbers of victims provided by the Bible.
This is so reassuring... (Score:3)
I honnestly for the life of me still don't understand how anyone can have a good image of this company.
How do they get ANY support ? They are the douchiest mean f*cks and they have no ethics whatsoever.
When you get to the point where people saying your shit doesn't smell good enough to be put in their sink gets you mad, I think it's really time to see a psychiatrist. Hopefully Jobs departure will put an end to this decade of giant ego and utter douchery (but I wouldn't hold my breath)
Re: (Score:2)
I honnestly for the life of me still don't understand how anyone can have a good image of this company.
Part of it is that Apple successfully prevents the masses from hearing about what is wrong with them. Banning this app is one such example. Another example is that Apple deletes documents from the knowledge base that make them look bad. B&W G3 has a UDMA data corruption problem that shows up with nearly all devices. Apple's fix (posted to the TIL) was to slow down the disk to PIO modes with FWB toolkit (commercial, for-pay software) or to use a Mac IDE PCI card, which at the time literally cost minimum
Re: (Score:2)
Meanwhile documents showing how bad DOS 5 was are still in Microsoft's pages.
If you've used Vista, DOS 5 was an improvement. <ducks>
Re: (Score:2)
and the windows app store (Score:2)
http://www.neowin.net/news/windows-8-app-store-approval-policy-outlined [neowin.net]
seems to have a faster approval process.
But apple and ms should have a adult area with little in the Content Compliance area.
Free market at work (Score:2)
Why, what's wrong with that? It points out what is so very wrong with government regulation. The "regulation" in this case being that pesky freedom of speech most people have to adhere to. If we just got rid of the government, then the free market can sort out everything - just like Apple is doing. Then we'll be in free market heaven, won't we?
Re: (Score:2)
Good on Apple (Score:2)
Well, good. It was stupid and useless. And Apple played right into their hands so they could have an inflammatory news story to promote their "back to hunter-gatherer lifestyle" agenda.
Maybe next time they can create one called Pencil Story [econlib.org].
Re: (Score:2)
what's the search term? I tried phone story and nothing.
Re: (Score:2)
thanks anyway bro it's not there I checked all 10 pages. Guess I will keep reading hackulous. Cheers.
Re: (Score:2)
So wait *now* they are the innovators and inventors of the smartphone?
Ok.
You heard it here first: slashdot admits Apple invented the smartphone and put in all the innovation. No backsies.
Re: (Score:2)
according to you fanbois yes, every time someone mentions a smartphone "you wouldnt have a smartphone without apple" but now its shed in a bad light "oh wait a min!"
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
No, my point to you was that in any Apple thread, regardless of what it's really about, there's always a flurry of /. posts about how Apple doesn't innovate, only steals, about how they take concepts that Linux and OSS was doing years ago and then "claim to invent" them and call them "magical" etc, and yet here you are claiming that Apple *are* the innovators and inventors of the smartphone.
I'm not under any illusion that Apple were not the first to make a smartphone, or mp3 player, or all-in-one computer,
Re: (Score:2)
some slashdotter ill-advisedly CLAIMS that Apple invented the smartphone.
But since Apple was still playing with its own poo when the smartphone was invented and since you know it, I don't understand : why the fuss fanboy ?
Re: (Score:2)
I'm sorry, what?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why? Apple is under no obligation to assist you in your "free dialogue" - they are not the government; they are within their rights to choose to carry or not carry specific products in their store and can tell you to get lost if you say things they disagree with.
In the same way that you cannot force a local shop owner to put up posters that he doesn't agree with in his own store - you can put them up, but you have no recourse if he takes them down and bans you from his store.
Whether it's a smart move on App
Re: (Score:2)
IMO, once you reach such a market share that you can control what a large part of the population can see or do, you should start being restricted by the first amendment as well.
I don't think it matters much who does the censoring. Whether it's the government or a corporation doesn't matter, the effect on the population does. It's just that back when the first amendment was written such control by a corporation wasn't on anybody's mind.
Re: (Score:2)
That is a very slippery slope to start perching on, and not one really worth taking just because you don't happen to like the corporation in question.
It specifically refers to the government for a good reason.
Re: (Score:2)
Slippery how? What problems do you see arising from it?
In my view, in regards to freedom of speech, it's the effective freedom of speech available to an individual that matters. Who restricts them isn't particularly important. Imagine that 99% of the software market is owned by Microsoft, who sets the condition that their software may not be used for disparaging them.
So what does it matter to you if the government doesn't prevent you from writing an article criticizing MS? Even if you are one of the 1% who
Re: (Score:2)
Ok, let's take your hypothetical onwards.
Let's say Microsoft runs some retail stores. I can now stand in them and talk to all their customers about anything I want, including criticising Microsoft.
Since they're now blocked by First Amendment issues they also cannot refuse to sell my piece of software in my store if I want them to (exactly like this app in Apple's app store that you are claiming Apple should not be able to remove due to First Amendment issues).
I could also get a job in Microsoft's stores, an
Re: (Score:2)
You already can do that.
Sure, they can ask you to leave, but AFAIK they can't do much if you decide to hang out around the door and hand out flyers so long you don't do something too disruptive like actually blocking the entrance.
Re: (Score:2)
Well it could be seen as a slanted and prejudicial kind of slander, to imply that Apple and others like them are predatory creatures playing on Human weakness. It could be say to be unrealistically insulting to Apple, its ilk, and to consumers as well in calling them unconscious dupes. If the app presented the alternative view as well, that some of us consumers may actually willingly and with awareness take part in the sharing of products with the caveats of advertisements, exploitation of workers, mining o
and GTA should show the prostitutes viewpoint (Score:2)
this thread is the ultimate proof that playing video games makes people unable to apply logic and reason to an argument.
but murdering prostitutes and stealing their money (Score:2)
well, thats just a laudy, noteworthy accomplishment in the further development of the art form that is the computer game.
also non-factual? red-alert 2 and starcraft. (Score:2)
the hypocrisy is here is just overwhelming. look at the video games you have played in your life, now try to apply the logic you are using against this game to any of those other games.
Re: (Score:2)
Come on. This game was specifically created to spread invalid facts.
You can't compare it to starcraft, which is designed to be a fun game to play.
Re: (Score:2)
People creating the game just meant to inform people in a funny way.
A bit naive, much?
Brand protection (Score:2)
Apple has a brand to protect, in a similar manner to Disney, which sounds weird, but then you go to Times Square in 2011 and nothing will ever seem that weird again.
Re: (Score:2)
The problem is that they have to protect the brand from the truth.
It's a truth for the whole industry, sure. Other corporations would do exactly the same, but they don't have the needed walled garden, sure.
It's no surprise, sure.
Re: (Score:2)
How dare they remind us that our beloved iPhones are made by underpaid chinese suicidal workers who are at it 16hours a day, with minerals that are mined by 12 years old congoleses.
How is it moral huh ? to say it I mean. No really SAYING IT IS THE PROBLEM ! Because I was confortably numb not think about that in my couch and now I have not to give a shit actively...
idiot.
Re: (Score:2)
Sure - why don't you do this and see?
Thought so.