Aller au contenu

Photo

Apple removes games with Confederate Flag from the app store


  • Ce sujet est fermé Ce sujet est fermé
489 réponses à ce sujet

#76
Guest_Puddi III_*

Guest_Puddi III_*
  • Guests

A store refusing to sell it anymore does not qualify as censorship, I agree. But what Apple is doing does quality and is censorship.


It's the app "store" curated by Apple. They're responsible for anything they sell so it's only natural that they have some measure of control over its content.

A developer agreeing to have their content hosted and promoted by Apple is agreeing to be subject to Apple's content policies. If they don't want that, I'm not familiar with how open Apple phones are, but presumably they could seek a third-party distribution method, or develop for a more agreeable platform.

I suppose that could be considered censorship, actually, but not in the sense that it violates anyone's guaranteed free speech under the first amendment. Free speech doesn't include forcing another private entity to endorse said speech.

#77
Riven326

Riven326
  • Members
  • 1 284 messages

It's the app "store" curated by Apple. They're responsible for anything they sell so it's only natural that they have some measure of control over its content.

A developer agreeing to have their content hosted and promoted by Apple is agreeing to be subject to Apple's content policies. If they don't want that, I'm not familiar with how open Apple phones are, but presumably they could seek a third-party distribution method, or develop for a more agreeable platform.

I suppose that could be considered censorship, actually, but not in the sense that it violates anyone's guaranteed free speech under the first amendment. Free speech doesn't include forcing another private entity to endorse said speech.

No, I would never say what Apple is doing or has done is unlawful. It's more like censorship driven by political correctness.



#78
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

@In Exile

I know that you're an intelligent person, but you clearly don't know a great deal about the American Civil War. As a history major who has studied the period, boiling down the motivations behind the founding of the Confederacy to a desire to perpetuate racism is extremely simplistic. (And besides, at the time racism in the northern "free" states tended to be much more vicious than it did in the south, ironicly)


When states make formal declarations extolling the virtue of slavery as the raison d'etre for their existence, I become highly sceptical of the claim that the ultimate basis for the war was something other than slavery.

And of course I agree that the US north was not any particular paragon of racial harmony. But that doesn't really absolve the confederacy.

#79
goofyomnivore

goofyomnivore
  • Members
  • 3 762 messages

*Sigh*

 

I know. We've already established that. Them having the right to take a game down for reasons X or Y does not negate the fact that it is still censorship. This is especially true for games using the flag in a historical context.

Okay well I don't see what your issue is then. A company has the right to censor whatever it wants. That's kind of the point of freedom. You can censor what you want and not censor what you want.

 

It's foolish for a multi billion dollar company to accommodate overly sensitive morons who will get outraged at a Confederate flag in games BASED ON THE AMERICAN CIVIL WAR.

Foolish? I doubt it. They pay people to figure out what will make them more money. Positive pr spin versus accommodating a controversial topic. Apple exists to make money first and foremost. I'm not arguing that it isn't incredibly stupid to censor a historical war game. But if they believe it is going to make them money in the long run they should censor it and its well within their rights.



#80
slimgrin

slimgrin
  • Members
  • 12 464 messages

No, I would never say what Apple is doing or has done is unlawful censorship.

 

This is actually a tricky point. I'm, not sure it qualifies as censorship in any way, no matter how ignorant it is. I guess if Apple had a strangle hold on the game market, if it was practically the only place to sell your game, it might qualify. The reality is IOS is a joke for gaming. Shows why Gaben didn't dare reject Hatred. he's too smart for that.



#81
Inquisitor Recon

Inquisitor Recon
  • Members
  • 11 810 messages

Foolish? I doubt it. They pay people to figure out what will make them more money. Positive pr spin versus accommodating a controversial topic. Apple exists to make money first and foremost. I'm not arguing that it is incredibly stupid to censor a historical war game. But if they believe it is going to make them money in the long run they should censor it and its well within their rights.

Well they need to stop hiring such unskilled spin doctors and stop contributing to the dumbing down of the American people which is all that is accomplished when people go off and censor something like this.



#82
Kaiser Arian XVII

Kaiser Arian XVII
  • Members
  • 17 283 messages

@In Exile

 

I know that you're an intelligent person, but you clearly don't know a great deal about the American Civil War.  As a history major who has studied the period, boiling down the motivations behind the founding of the Confederacy to a desire to perpetuate racism is extremely simplistic.  (And besides, at the time racism in the northern "free" states tended to be much more vicious than it did in the south, ironicly)

 

And as a bachelor of History I know that the reason of war was partially the conflict between the northern industrialists and the southern "feudalists" "farmlords".

eh, can't find the right word...


  • Heimdall aime ceci

#83
Guest_Puddi III_*

Guest_Puddi III_*
  • Guests

No, I would never say what Apple is doing or has done is unlawful. It's more like censorship driven by political correctness.


Fair enough.

#84
Riven326

Riven326
  • Members
  • 1 284 messages

Okay well I don't see what your issue is then. A company has the right to censor whatever it wants. That's kind of the point of freedom. You can censor what you want and not censor what you want.

My issue is video games are being censored just for existing, and the developers being told that they have to recode the game and change things in order for the game to be allowed back onto the store. I never said Apple doesn't have the right to do that, but it doesn't change the fact that what they are doing is wrong and cowardly. It's not being done for any reason other than to support political correctness and to make them seem like the good guys, lest they be outdone by Wal-Mart... lol



#85
goofyomnivore

goofyomnivore
  • Members
  • 3 762 messages

Well they need to stop hiring such unskilled spin doctors and stop contributing to the dumbing down of the American people which is all that is accomplished when people go off and censor something like this.

Apple would be doing itself a financial disservice educating the lowest common denominator. Dumb consumers are easier to sell products to than intelligent consumers. Do people really think Apple is an ethical company that cares about anyone? Did people forget who Steve Jobs was?

 

My issue is video games are being censored just for existing, and the developers being told that they have to recode the game and change things in order for the game to be allowed back onto the store. I never said Apple doesn't have the right to do that, but it doesn't change the fact that what they are doing is wrong and cowardly. It's not being done for any reason other than to support political correctness and to make them seem like the good guys, lest they be outdone by Wal-Mart... lol

 
Fair enough. I'd be more mad at the average consumer than Apple tho. Apple will continue bullying and ripping people off until people take a stand against them.


#86
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

My issue is video games are being censored just for existing, and the developers being told that they have to recode the game and change things in order for the game to be allowed back onto the store. I never said Apple doesn't have the right to do that, but it doesn't change the fact that what they are doing is wrong and cowardly. It's not being done for any reason other than to support political correctness and to make them seem like the good guys, lest they be outdone by Wal-Mart... lol


The word censorship is still wrong. Private companies aren't obligated to give you a platform. If you think people should have the means to express their views in this way you'd have to argue for government intervention and regulation.

#87
Inquisitor Recon

Inquisitor Recon
  • Members
  • 11 810 messages

Apple would be doing itself a financial disservice educating the lowest common denominator. Dumb consumers are easier to sell products to than intelligent consumers. Do people really think Apple is an ethical company that cares about anyone. Did people forget who Steve Jobs was?

But in this case they are preventing the sale of a product. I find it difficult to believe that the sales here are outweighed by moronic consumers who will see this and go "Apple is a great ethical company" and buy more from them as a result. I know people are stupid but is there anybody other than the Apple fanboys who believe that nonsense. Despite how much I hate everybody even I have to believe that most people aren't so brainwashed to buy into that "we care" crap from big companies.



#88
The Hierophant

The Hierophant
  • Members
  • 6 910 messages

The word censorship is still wrong. Private companies aren't obligated to give you a platform. If you think people should have the means to express their views in this way you'd have to argue for government intervention and regulation.

What about self censorship?



#89
Heimdall

Heimdall
  • Members
  • 13 229 messages

If I could quote right now (Does that just not work on IE?) and wasn't at work, I'd love to continue this conversation about the motivations of the civil war, but alas...



#90
Riven326

Riven326
  • Members
  • 1 284 messages

This is actually a tricky point. I'm, not sure it qualifies as censorship in any way, no matter how ignorant it is. I guess if Apple had a strangle hold on the game market, if it was practically the only place to sell your game, it might qualify. The reality is IOS is a joke for gaming. Shows why Gaben didn't dare reject Hatred. he's too smart for that.

It'd be one thing if you could get that content elsewhere, like the flag that Wal-Mart doesn't want to stock anymore, it can be found at a dollar store and is probably cheaper too. But Apple's store is huge and gives a lot of these developers more of an opportunity to succeed. A lot of the games can only be found there.

 

To have Apple email you and say that your Civil War game has been taken down because it has a confederate flag in it, is not only ridiculous in and of itself, but to then be told that you must replace the flag with something else, is a very clear indication that what is happening is censorship of the flag.



#91
goofyomnivore

goofyomnivore
  • Members
  • 3 762 messages

But in this case they are preventing the sale of a product. I find it difficult to believe that the sales here are outweighed by moronic consumers who will see this and go "Apple is a great ethical company" and buy more from them as a result. I know people are stupid but is there anybody other than the Apple fanboys who believe that nosense. As much as I hate everybody even I have to believe that most people aren't so brainwashed to buy into that crap.

 

I don't have Apple's numbers or projections, but I doubt they made the decision without a good idea of what it would do to their profits. You don't get to where Apple is by winging it. They may lose some sales, but their brand value may increase. I'd rather have mainstream dumb American's interested in my product rather than niche app consumers and developers.

 

Who knows maybe it backfires. Apple has messed up before, but I doubt they made their decision without financial consideration. And Apple is very good at making money.

 

It'd be one thing if you could get that content elsewhere, like the flag that Wal-Mart doesn't want to stock anymore, it can be found at a dollar store and is probably cheaper too. But Apple's store is huge and gives a lot of these developers more of an opportunity to succeed. A lot of the games can only be found there.

 

To have Apple email you and say that your Civil War game has been taken down because it has a confederate flag in it, is not only ridiculous in and of itself, but to then be told that you must replace the flag with something else, is a very clear indication that what is happening is censorship of the flag.

 
Same stuff happened to cigarettes. Companys freaked out, and distanced/censored themselves of cigarettes anyway they could. 


#92
In Exile

In Exile
  • Members
  • 28 738 messages

What about self censorship?


I don't think it's appropriately used when it comes to private business. There's room for discussion about how popular views should be reflected, but I don't think there's a good umbrella term here.

What, for example, Apple does is very different from what a public university might do.

#93
TheJester000

TheJester000
  • Members
  • 369 messages

They're different, but not in any material respect when it comes to moral repugnancy. Each represents and was founded expressly for the sake of a disturbing and disguisting ideology, and in general in defence of genocide and crimes against humanity.

 

 

Yes, really. By definition. Genocide isn't just mass killing, though the slavers did that too. It is also the eradication of culture, mass displacement, the theft of children and control of reproduction...

Check out the UN definition.

 

By this logic you need to condemn the United States and ban our flag as well considering the original colonists committed mass genocide on the native Americans who we stole this country from. The irony whenever Americans talk about situations like this is incredible.



#94
Torgette

Torgette
  • Members
  • 1 422 messages

As somebody who grew up in the South, the Confederate Battle flag belongs in a museum and nowhere else really. It's not even the true Confederate flag, and the people who put it up completely understand what they're doing and why (and it's not about being educated about history). That said I think anything with historical context is fine whether it's a game based on the civil war, an actual battleground, or a cemetery. Just not on a capitol building or a state flag - you lost, you were on the wrong side of history, get over it.


  • SwobyJ et Cknarf aiment ceci

#95
Fast Jimmy

Fast Jimmy
  • Members
  • 17 939 messages

I, personally, think you need to take a history lesson if you believe the American Civil War is as black and white as you make it out to be.

I am well aware that the Civil War was about more than just slavery. Or that the Union winning was the end of slavery in America.

But the Confederate flag used today was not the flag of the Confederacy - it's the Battle flag of Northern Virginia that the KKK mistakenly began using in the 20th century to promote themselves in the South under their racist ideologue. Anyone who uses this flag is identifying either with a very small Virginian unit as opposed to the Confedracy as a whole, or they are promoting the KKK (albeit possibly out of ignorance).

If the argument is really about history or culture, it is worth pointing out that what is known as The Confederate Flag is neither.
  • Dermain aime ceci

#96
Dovahzeymahlkey

Dovahzeymahlkey
  • Members
  • 2 651 messages

Considering todays volatile outrage environment, I dont blame them.



#97
Han Shot First

Han Shot First
  • Members
  • 21 160 messages

I support the right of private individuals to fly their rebel flags, because I support the right to freedom of speech.

 

It is however a banner that represents both treason and a misguided attempt to found a country based on a doctrine of white supremacy. As such it has no place being flown from any public or government building in the United States.

 

Also the notion that slavery wasn't the primary cause of the American Civil War is Lost Cause / Neo-Confederate mythology. It has absolutely no basis in historical fact.


  • SwobyJ aime ceci

#98
Fast Jimmy

Fast Jimmy
  • Members
  • 17 939 messages

I don't think it's appropriately used when it comes to private business. There's room for discussion about how popular views should be reflected, but I don't think there's a good umbrella term here.

What, for example, Apple does is very different from what a public university might do.

Maybe from a legal perspective, but that doesn't make it any less censorship. The actually deifnition of the word applies to what Apple is doing - intentionally blocking a certain type of content across the board, regardless of its context. That's censorship - plain and simple.

#99
Han Shot First

Han Shot First
  • Members
  • 21 160 messages

Looking back at the some of the posts in this thread, I noticed the American flag was mentioned...and some apparently see it as hypocrisy that Confederate flags are associated with racism while the American flag is not.

 

For those people I suggest reading the speech given by Confederate Vice President Alexander Stephens in 1861, where he lays out the differences between his new 'nation' and the United States they had seceded from.

 

 

 

The new constitution has put at rest, forever, all the agitating questions relating to our peculiar institution -- African slavery as it exists amongst us -- the proper status of the n3gro in our form of civilization. This was the immediate cause of the late rupture and present revolution. Jefferson in his forecast, had anticipated this, as the "rock upon which the old Union would split." He was right. What was conjecture with him, is now a realized fact. But whether he fully comprehended the great truth upon which that rock stood and stands, may be doubted. The prevailing ideas entertained by him and most of the leading statesmen at the time of the formation of the old constitution, were that the enslavement of the African was in violation of the laws of nature; that it was wrong in principle, socially, morally, and politically. It was an evil they knew not well how to deal with, but the general opinion of the men of that day was that, somehow or other in the order of Providence, the institution would be evanescent and pass away. This idea, though not incorporated in the constitution, was the prevailing idea at that time. The constitution, it is true, secured every essential guarantee to the institution while it should last, and hence no argument can be justly urged against the constitutional guarantees thus secured, because of the common sentiment of the day. Those ideas, however, were fundamentally wrong. They rested upon the assumption of the equality of races. This was an error. It was a sandy foundation, and the government built upon it fell when the "storm came and the wind blew."

 

Our new government is founded upon exactly the opposite idea; its foundations are laid, its corner- stone rests upon the great truth, that the n3gro is not equal to the white man; that slavery -- subordination to the superior race -- is his natural and normal condition. [Applause.] This, our new government, is the first, in the history of the world, based upon this great physical, philosophical, and moral truth. This truth has been slow in the process of its development, like all other truths in the various departments of science. It has been so even amongst us. Many who hear me, perhaps, can recollect well, that this truth was not generally admitted, even within their day. The errors of the past generation still clung to many as late as twenty years ago. Those at the North, who still cling to these errors, with a zeal above knowledge, we justly denominate fanatics. All fanaticism springs from an aberration of the mind -- from a defect in reasoning. It is a species of insanity. One of the most striking characteristics of insanity, in many instances, is forming correct conclusions from fancied or erroneous premises; so with the anti-slavery fanatics; their conclusions are right if their premises were. They assume that the n3gro is equal, and hence conclude that he is entitled to equal privileges and rights with the white man. If their premises were correct, their conclusions would be logical and just -- but their premise being wrong, their whole argument fails. I recollect once of having heard a gentleman from one of the northern States, of great power and ability, announce in the House of Representatives, with imposing effect, that we of the South would be compelled, ultimately, to yield upon this subject of slavery, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics, as it was in physics or mechanics. That the principle would ultimately prevail. That we, in maintaining slavery as it exists with us, were warring against a principle, a principle founded in nature, the principle of the equality of men. The reply I made to him was, that upon his own grounds, we should, ultimately, succeed, and that he and his associates, in this crusade against our institutions, would ultimately fail. The truth announced, that it was as impossible to war successfully against a principle in politics as it was in physics and mechanics, I admitted; but told him that it was he, and those acting with him, who were warring against a principle. They were attempting to make things equal which the Creator had made unequal.

 

Cornerstone Speech

 

There is no question that racism existed in the United States long before the Civil War, and continued to exist long after it. The United States however was not explicitly founded on a doctrine of white supremacy, unlike the Confederacy, and in many ways it can be argued that America's failings were in not living up to the country's highest ideals. The Declaration of Independence declared, "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." The Confederates rejected this, and instead attempted to found a nation based on the doctrine that all men are not created equal.

 

The Confederacy was one of the more vile governments in human history, and it richly earned its place in history's garbage heap. It would be fitting if its flags followed suit. 


  • In Exile, Dermain, The Hierophant et 1 autre aiment ceci

#100
BroBear Berbil

BroBear Berbil
  • Members
  • 1 516 messages

This hysteria over the flag is your typical knee-jerk reaction that comes after any of these incidents. This time there was a clear racial angle so people are going for the flag more than the gun issue, and since most of the country outside of the South has no attachment towards the flag it's an easy target.

 

Seriously, it takes some major hubris for people in other parts of the country to demand that Southern states change their symbols and hide their history. The media is overplaying its hand on this and trying to force change is only going to cause more resentment. By some accounts I read this Roof guy was first radicalized by the media spectacle around Trayvon Martin, so another media spectacle is sure to solve all racism and not make any more monsters.

 

The flag means different things to different people. As somebody currently living in LA I  can tell you that for a lot of people that flag is simply about "Rebel Pride", Dukes of Hazzard, and Southern identity. And the thing is it's not stopping at the flag. I've already seen things about a statue vandalized, people calling for monuments to be destroyed, street names to change, etc. Anyway, it's up to the states to change it.

 

The corporate banning of the flag is their right, but I think it's a dumb overreaction and misdirection to score some easy PR. Banning the flag in a historical context, however, is especially idiotic.