Comments on: Apple approves 'Baby Shaker' for App Store

Despite a policy of banning iPhone applications that contain foul language, Apple has approved an application that simulates infanticide.

[ibeetle]

It is probably not any nefarious hypocrisy in the iPhones App approval process. Almost certainly the person who reviewed the app has no children and a immature, sick sense of humor and thought the app was funny so they let it pass.

I am not all that concerned about the apps approval. If you do not like it... do not buy it. If it cost Apple money in complaints or boycotts, what ever then Apple will remove it. What bugs me is someone sick enough to actually code and create such an application... then actually find it funny to submit it for sale.

[Lerianis3]

I have to agree totally. While I think that the person who made this app is a little sick..... as long as he isn't doing this in real life, it doesn't matter if he is a little sick or has a sick sense of humor.

[El_Segfaulto]

There certainly is a hypocrisy when apps that allow tethering, true VOIP, and video streaming (the South Park fiasco), or anything with a naughty word are summarily rejected and something like this is allowed.

[randomstu]

ibettle wrote...
> Almost certainly the person who reviewed the app has no children
> and a immature, sick sense of humor and thought the app was
> funny so they let it pass.

This is unsupported, wild speculation; a guess, not "almost certain." Isn't it possible that the person who reviewed the app has some respect and understanding of free markets, and decided to let the consumer decide whether or not the app is funny or worth buying? It's irrelevent whether the reviewer himself thought it was funny.

Any business person understands this. An ice cream vendor doesn't include a flavor because he thinks it tastes good. He includes it if he thinks consumers might buy it.

Anyway, there are many more apps we now need to question. Can you believe that Apple also offers a murderous app called "Hangman"?! This sick and disgusting piece of violence, disguised as a simple "word game," lets a user simulate an execution, hanging an anorexic human being by the neck till he chokes to death. "Hangman" is a horrific and dangerous game... for those of us who have difficulty distinguishing an imaginary game from reality.

Stuart

[rolegp]

Which one of you morons at apple approved this one?

[fgermann]

Hey, this kind of offensive content is nothing new. When I was a child (I am 66 now) I actually read a poem by someone by the name of Mother Goose that went something like this:

Rock-a-bye baby, in the treetop,
When the wind blows, the cradle will rock,
When the bough breaks, the cradle will fall,
And down will come baby, cradle and all.

[ikramerica--2008]

At least you mentioned the company who makes this stupid game, even it was in passing.

It's obviously apple's fault, though. Because there are no sick and twisted games for any other platform than the iPhone, right?

Ever visit the Adult Swim game site?

[ibeetle]

You are exactly right. RapePlay, a game where the goal is to rape a girl is perfectly O.K. as long as it is not on the iPhone. Even if RapePlay was originaly sold on Amazon, and nobody said a word.

[Sausagebiscuit]

If you don't like the game, or are offended by it.... well don't play it. Simple, no?

[monkeyfun14]

Next to Apologist is your picture

[blondepianist]

Somebody needs to be fired.

[EarthMatters]

Couldn't agree more.

[Hep Cat]

Looking forward to similar hysterics about the Blackberry app store.

Oh, wait...

[alasdairdrennan]

This is not acceptable. I doubt that i will last very long... I can't believe it was allowed, let alone had the cheek to charge.

[LordSnotrag]

It wouldn't shock me if this was done for the simple point of getting something truly offensive past Apple's guidelines around approving an app for their store. An exercise in, "How revolting an app can we build yet still get approved?"

Whether it was or was not such an exercise, the result is the same: Apple's approval priorities are a bit out of whack.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Good point, it could be a test case indeed.

In any case, Apple will need to pull this one down immediately before the press runs with this and it becomes a PR nightmare.

Wow.

[Tuncer_Deniz_995]

This is awful! Email Apple to have it removed!

[bootchmagoo]

Ummm... I'm pretty sure that some of you are a bit mixed up. No one is forcing you to buy or use the app, so what's the problem?

Do I think it's in bad taste? Yes. Do I question the character of a person who buys/uses this app? Yes. Do I think it's Apple's problem? Absolutely not. As far as I can tell, it doesn't violate any of the App Store's rules.

If you don't like it, don't buy it.

[Sausagebiscuit]

Yup. More case of people stick their nose where it doesn't belong. It might be socially or morally unacceptable, but if it doesn't violate the terms of service, then there is no problem with it being approved. Just because Apple sells it doesn't mean they support it anyway.

[Vegaman_Dan]

@Sausagebiscuit wrote:

"Just because Apple sells it doesn't mean they support it anyway."

That right there is the point- they have a process to approve or deny any application submitted. This application went through that process (which could be random darts on a dart board, lucky throw of the dice, or whatever) that Apple set up and it was approved. Apple takes a 30% cut of the money made from this application.

This means they do very much approve and endorse the application. THAT is the problem they face here. This will force Apple to either redress the way they do application processing or face some serious PR issues.

[c_netter]

"Don't like it, don't buy it" is saying look the other way when you see something horribly wrong and disgusting. Society needs everyone to take a moral stand when faced with grevious behavior, or there is no civil society. History is full of citizens who just looked the other way--easy to do, but wrong. You need to take a stand.

[Dalkorian]

by c_netter April 23, 2009 7:07 AM PDT
"Don't like it, don't buy it" is saying look the other way when you see something horribly wrong and disgusting.

----------------------------------------------------------------

It's amazing how people just don't get it. NO ONE GOT HURT. In fact, it's more accurate to say "it's saying look the other way when you see ART that you find horribly wrong and disgusting."

I wouldn't ever buy this myself, but that doesn't mean I think it should be banned outright. Explain how killing people in other games is more right than shaking a baby until it stops crying and gets a red 'X' over each eye in this game is.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Apple would be wise to pull this one- they have pulled other apps they deemed offensive due to content, language, etc. To allow this in the Apps Store would make it appear that Apple approves of and endorses child abuse.

Not exactly the sort of image Apple would want to have, I would think. :\

Perfect example of how broken the approval process is.

Just... wow. What were you thinking, Apple? How could you possibly condone this?

[Sausagebiscuit]

Them approving the game does not mean they support or condone any of the content with in the game. It just means that it does not violate any of their Terms or any Laws.

[TerryCHayes]

As appalling as the App itself is, that isn't the only issue here. The issue is the terrible communication occurring at Apple. This example furthers the notion that an app's approval relies heavily on which employee is processing your submission. There needs to be a clear, uniform system to approving apps, and all employees need to abide by this system. I don't have a problem with Apple changing their requirements, but they must apply them uniformly.

- Terry
Twitter: TCHayes

[vio1234]

I would be disappointed if Apple pulled this app. Just because an app is considered in bad taste should not warrant removal. If it is in that bad of taste people will not get it, otherwise people will. Let the market determine what is in bad taste. If Apple does this than what are the parameters for what is in good taste or not?

[Vegaman_Dan]

If that turns out to be the case, then applications for "Shoot the President" with Obama's face on it should be allowed as well, yes? Sure it's offensive and disrespectful, but it have to be allowed.

How about an app called, "KILL ALL JEWS" ? Again, if Baby Shaker is allowed, then you have to allow all of it by that same logic.

Yes, it's all in bad taste. It *is* legal. But if Apple leaves this one in, expect it to be brought up anytime someone mentions Apple- you know, the company that approves of murdering children for fun and profit. That's how it would be spun and Apple would be hard pressed to deny it when the app is right there in their own Appstore. The press would love to keep bringing it up again and again.

[Sausagebiscuit]

I think any kind of threat to the President or his members part or in whole is illegal. Hate crimes are also illegal. Shaking a baby is not illegal, at least until physical harm is done -- or if seen by others to where they believe harm will happen.

You yourself call it "legal", so I don't get the issue... besides the social/moral aspect that it is wrong and can lead to something illegal. No I don't like the app so I won't buy it... amazing theory huh?

[Vegaman_Dan]

@Sausagebiscuit:

A game in which you are simulating political assassination is not illegal. It's just in very bad taste.

A game in which you kill babies is similarly in bad taste.

These sorts of games are indeed legal.

You are not forced to buy the app at all- and that isn't the point at all. The point is that Apple approved of the application and its content. How they approved it is another matter that they will need to address likely.

It's not a good position for Apple to be in at this point.

[ascavage]

by Sausagebiscuit April 22, 2009 12:43 PM PDT
I think any kind of threat to the President or his members part or in whole is illegal. Hate crimes are also illegal. Shaking a baby is not illegal, at least until physical harm is done -- or if seen by others to where they believe harm will happen.

Uhhh...Hello? Didn't they make a whole movie about the assination of George W. Bush? How come that was not ILLEGAL?

[jbhertel]

@ Sausagebiscuit

"Shaking a baby is not illegal, at least until physical harm is done -- or if seen by others to where they believe harm will happen."

You seem to be saying that it's only illegal if it causes harm or others see it. So if I punch you in the face but don't leave any bruises or cuts and no one saw me do it, then I can't be arrested for assault, right?

Besides that, physical harm occurs the instant a baby is forcefully shaken because its head rotates about the neck uncontrollably since infants' neck muscles aren't well developed. This violent motion slams the back and forth within the skull, rupturing blood vessels and nerves and causing bruising and bleeding to the brain.

Also, shaking a baby is classified as child abuse, which is most definitely a crime. If you shake a baby and are caught, you will be arrested.

[sanjayb]

Apple should adopt a ratings system similar to movies. Allow these types of apps that are questionable in humour, porn and bad language but put an appropriate rating of Restricted or something to that affect. Then have the users decide whether to go ahead and download the app. At least Apple's vetting process wouldn't be under soo much scrutiny.

Sadly there are people that find a need for such apps.

[Vegaman_Dan]

Apple actually did have a ratings system for adult content for the Appstore, but they chose to remove it.

[jjx64]

cuss words = unaccepable
nudity = terribly unacceptable
graphic violence = OK

Thems the rules, just ask any of the major networks.

[Vegaman_Dan]

As long as Apple is fine with being called the computer compnay that approves of child murder simulators, then thre is no problem. It's their choice in the end.

[johnqh]

Isn't that the same rule for all gaming platforms?

Killing people = OK
Naked = no

[thelemurking]

child murder simulators? how is that different than first person shooters? are those mass murder simulators? I guess I need to go play some resident evil since that's a zombie killer simulator, that way I will be better prepared for the inevitable zombie apocolypse ;) if only there was a zombie baby shacker simulator so I can deal with the babies killed in the original baby shaker app. after all, zombie babies are still zombies and not to be underestimated.

hasn't there been enough studies to show that video games do not lead to violence? I don't see how the baby shaker app is any different... it's not like we have a massive teenage army of Halo 3 kids running around shooting everyone, so I doubt we will have bunch of tweens putting down their phones to rush and shake the baby.

[Angmarr]

haha ... i mean so wrong, im so offended ...

[Sausagebiscuit]

That's nice... since you are offended and you stated your opinion on the matter, that is all .. right? Vote with your 99 cents. Don't view it, don't download it, and encourage others. Otherwise leave it alone and you will forget about it in a few days.

[Angmarr]

I don't have an iphone (don't want 1 either) i was just saying sarcastically that people are free to download whatever they want.

[seven7dust]

this is some crazy stuff !

[ikramerica--2008]

And wait, doesn't this game teach a valuable lesson? If you shake a baby to make it stop crying, you will end up killing it. Once you manage that, you can move on to "My L'il Ba5tard" at Adult Swim...

[hypermike28]

sick bastards. down with apple. Turds!

[Sausagebiscuit]

Apple had nothing to do with the creation of this game, or the content with in the game. Don't hate apple, hate the creator of the software. Also, if you don't like it, don't buy it or view it, etc.

[ikramerica--2008]

sausage:
of course you wouldn't know that by reading the article, which talks about how Apple did wrong but gives the game's creator a free pass.

Apple also sells songs with explicit language on the iTunes store. Some of that music promotes bad stuff! Shock and horror.

The point the author was trying to make, badly, was that Apple has standards and they let this one slip by. Oooo, crime against humanity. Once it was discovered, Apple pulled it! No hypocrisy, just an initial mistake corrected?

[Vegaman_Dan]

@ikramerica--2008:

I am reminded of how Apple denied an application that would play Family Guys clips stating that the content was offensive, however they sell the full episodes containing that same 'offensive' content in the iTunes store.

Double standards, anyone?

[Plumadona]

Charming. Just in time for Mother's Day? Very disappointing.

[monkeyfun14]

This is absolutely horrible.