Posted on 07/16/2010 5:28:30 PM PDT by the invisib1e hand
Is there really such a thing as "freedom from porn?"
Maybe not completely. But Apple CEO Steve Jobs wants to make his iPhones and iPads as porn-free as possible—banning the use of apps containing pornography and "adult" images from the wildly popular devices. (Apps are free or inexpensive mini-programs that are downloaded into smartphones and, now, the iPad.)
Jobs' numerous critics jumped on the anti-porn policy, which was quietly started in February and picked up this spring with the iPad's release. They filled the blogosphere with cries of censorship and freedom of speech "violations." One e-mail critic even accused the computer giant of becoming "moral police."
The critics are out of line, and we applaud Jobs and Apple Inc. for their stand.
Said Jobs: "(We) believe we have a moral responsibility to keep porn off the iPhone." Indeed, he even suggested that those who want to view pornography on their smartphones should purchase a competitor's model, where "you can download porn, your kids can download porn."
"That's a place we don't want to go," he said, "so we're not going to go there."
To be sure, the Internet remains a powerful and relatively untamed frontier where images and information—including Web sites dedicated to pornography and other objectionable matter—travel at lightening speed. Making it worse, the Internet offers it up anonymously, bringing it directly into one's home or one's phone.
That's why having such a major tech player as Apple hold up a stop sign, even one that's limited to the company's own apps, is such a welcome development. It raises awareness of a problem and it's a policy that could influence others down the road. Microsoft, in fact, has already announced that "pornography...or content that a reasonable person would consider to be adult or borderline adult content" will not be allowed in apps on the Windows Phone 7 to be released later this year.
Recently, opponents of pornography came together in Washington for a briefing that explored the increasing consequences of pornography in today's world. The audience included members of Congress and their staffs; speakers included anti-porn experts from the academic and psychological fields and a former pornography performer. The organizers' purpose was to educate members of Congress about the real-life consequences of pornography and to encourage them to fight for stronger enforcement of existing obscenity laws.
One of the speakers, from a group dedicated to making the Internet safer for children and families, gave examples of how easy it is for children to be exposed to pornography online, whether accidentally or intentionally, and said there's a need to cry out, "Enough is enough!"
In a way, that's what Steve Jobs and Apple are doing with their new policy, and what Microsoft plans as well. And it's more than just crying out. It's action, in an area where too little action has been taken.
In an exchange with a blogger who complained about Apple's anti-porn policy, Jobs wrote, "You might care more about porn when you have kids...It's not about freedom. It's about Apple trying to do the right thing for its users."
Indeed it is.
That was the "spin" that Microsoft put on it.
Think about it. If you are bailing out an ailing company with an investment of that size, you insist on voting shares—not 3-year, restricted, preferred non-voting shares. You put a representative on the Board of Directors—you have the clout to do that. You do not agree to give your intellectual property to your primary competitor in perpetuity for free, while agreeing to license a key set of theirs from them for a large licensing fee for a limited period if you have that clout. None of that happened because it was directed by Apple, to be most favorable to Apple, in order to get the settlement done, and make the lawsuit go away.
On the other hand, while Apple was hurting, having had a year of losses, it was not as bad as some were claiming. They had just posted a quarterly profit, and at the time of the Microsoft injection of cash, Apple had approximately $1.4 billion in cash and other liquid assets. . . not counting inventory in the pipeline.
“They could care less, however, if their customers use their products to seek out such products, or even use them to produce pornography.”
That’s my point: Jobs is being painted as this great anti-porn crusader, whereas in reality all he’s done is limit participation in one (small, I imagine) part of the “adult” market.
I think it's a little bigger than you think it is, though. One of the biggest problem porn producers have is that nobody trusts them. A guy who would be willing to throw twenty bucks at porn (as long as the wife and kids don't know) is afraid to give an online porn merchant his credit card number.
Porno apps and subscriptions on the iPad would have been a significant revenue stream for the porn industry because Apple would have been providing the "respectable face" where people wouldn't be afraid to provide information. Porn makes money because it's so cheap to produce. The "Girls Gone Wild" guy made millions with a camcorder. He didn't even pay the girls. Even a relatively low selling app could have made a guy a fortune.
The big movie companies, including Disney, have for years been trying to make porn "respectable" enough that they can pull it mainstream and do the same thing they've done with Hannah Montana, which is to take marginally talented people and turn them into cash cows. Apple backed away from that, by refusing to provide a conduit.
This would not have stayed at a "buy pictures of the Swedish Bikini Team" level. It would have turned into a very seedy neighborhood.
He is doing what he can with HIS company... He is saying his company will not participate. What more can he do but set an example?
Good for Jobs.
I have never needed nor ever been interested in porn.
I will buy an iPhone should they ever switch to Verizon, but for now, I just took my new Droid X out of the box. Of course, folks will now think that I bought it for the porn. LOL
My first impression of this phone is that it’s going to be great. The iPhone will be next.. when they go to Verizon.
Again... good for Jobs.
as regards this and your other input, confirmed once again is my gut sense that porn people are disconnected from reason.
Swordmaker, while what you assert certainly has the ring of authenticity to it, I can only accept it on such, as there's no way for me to verify it. The fact that I can't find an account of it could bolster the conspiracy theory of media, or it might just be...
Ah, well. There's this... when AAPL was flirting with 13 dollars, the Dow was making (then) all time highs. Hmm.
I certainly think the problem was longer and deeper than a single bad quarter -- I seem to recall pretty much everyone in the equities community (save a few disciples) being of the mind that AAPL was yesterday's news -- and at that moment, I believe it was just about so. At that time, iirc, it was all about search engines and the world had yet to have the iPod unleashed upon it.
Rather than be all defensive, one might thank Mr. Jobs for doing what needed to be done at the time. Sure seems to have worked out well for most everyone. It's a remarkable story.
Well, I guess I’d better not compete in any celebrity trivia games, huh?
It was more than a single bad quarter for Apple... they had had a bad year... but were already turning the corner and had posted a quarter of profits.
I'm not being defensive about it... I'm setting the record straight. The three interlocking agreements, signed the same day, are available on the internet to be read through lexus/nexus. I've read them. Each of them references the other and each hinged on the settlement of the lawsuit. The lawsuit would ONLY be withdrawn when Apple received the $150 million from MS, the signed agreement to continue development and production of MS Office for Mac for five years, and the signed IP licenses.
I do thank Jobs for doing what had to be done to get this distraction off the table for both companies. MS had actually cancelled MS Office for Mac... something Apple desperately needed for continued viable sales of Macs. MS was using it as leverage in the lawsuit. MS had the anti-trust suit staring it in the face... and had THAT as something that could come back to bite them if it were found out. Pima facie evidence of exactly what they were accused of... using market position of their products to maintain their monopoly position. They wanted it to go away. Jobs new this and did a Judo leverage on them to settle the lawsuit to Apple's advantage.
bump.
Can I help it if I'm a biography junkie? One of my favorite short bio sites is the Notable Names Database, otherwise known as NNDB.
Sounds like an interesting site.
and yet the app store sells sexy “screen stuff”
I think this is a viral marketing campaign.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.