8 ms·
No Sex Please, We’re Apple: iPhone Giant Seeks TV Success on Its Own Terms
- reaperducer 8y agoI’m OK with this. The market is already saturated with entertainment that is little more than shock value. There’s a reason that channels like GSN, RFD, MeTV, etc... have growing audiences. As some point people want their entertainment to be entertaining, not a stream of sensory overload. If Apple goes all-in in this programming strategy, we’ll have a better idea how popular this sort of thing really is.
- SllX 8y agoAdding onto this, Apple is just one more production company in a competitive field. Either their original movies and shows will stand up on their own and find an audience, or they won't, and choosing not to produce adult-oriented shows/movies won't really affect the calculus too much. Maybe they don't produce the next Game of Thrones, but maybe they make their own in-house Pixar, or maybe they could try to do either or both and still fail as a production company.
- jjeaff 8y agoIt couldn't hurt to get a large number of apple employees using Apple products to produce animated films and other cinematic stuff. Let their own employees tell them how they are screwing things up for their power users. Perhaps they could win back some of the market share for high end producers.
- scarface74 8y agoThat’s the purpose of “Pro Workflow Team” at Apple. https://www.macstories.net/linked/the-mac-pro-is-coming-in-2019-shaped-by-apples-new-pro-workflow-team/ https://www.macstories.net/linked/the-mac-pro-is-coming-in-2...
- reaperducer 8y agomaybe they make their own in-house Pixar It would be interesting to see if there was a mandate to use Apple gear in the render farm.
- belorn 8y agoThere are two paths to reduced how much shock value and sensory overload there is. Either culturally we can change and view sex and nudity as less shocking and simply part of life, or we reinforce old values by making it more taboo. I would prefer entertainment to be more entertaining by simply viewing sex and nudity as less shocking.
- reaperducer 8y agoThat seems like a very simplistic view. Life is not boolean, and neither are human beings. Denigrating a particular point of view as "old" and using "taboo" illustrates that you've already closed your mind to alternatives. Some of the most shocking and suspenseful films ever made had little to no nudity or violence. They did so through good writing and production. Throwing a bunch of blood or boobs on the screen is cheap and easy and attracts like-minded audiences. Making quality entertainment is hard. Also, thinking that blood and gore and nudity never existed in entertainment before the modern age and that the "old" values were puritanical is simply false. Shock value has existed as long as there have been books printed, movies made, and photos captured. The things published today have nothing on some of the illustrated gore from the 16th century.
- DoreenMichele 8y agoThe way to make a body part sexy is to cover it and keep it covered. Letting it all hang out, all the time actually reduces sexiness. There are huge social, psychological and emotional components to human sexuality. The physical aspects are just one piece of the equation. There are consequences to making it all too prosaic to have everything on display and they aren't all positive by any stretch of the imagination.
- amag 8y agoI wish they would go a little bit further in their restraints, also not ok: * Giganormous battles between robots, demons, superheroes, mutants or aliens in CG (puppets/masks/costume/makeup is ok). * Two mortal enemies that need to coöperate (no you're not going to bring a new angle to this, and no it won't be funny). * Anything including a magical database or magical computer programs that will do whatever you need right now. * Time-travel in non-scifi movies/series (e.g. super-assassin in Jason Bourne traveling from Rome to Athens and arrives five minutes after Jason Bourne was spotted). Maybe then we could get some movies that depend on good writing...or maybe I'm just dreaming...
- neonate 8y agohttp://archive.is/D2MSl http://archive.is/D2MSl
- village-idiot 8y agoI understand that this is largely a marketing strategy, and I'm fine with that. What's always kind of hilarious is when their "no porn" strategy, again a marketing choice, is portrayed by third parties as a moral issue for Apple. I mean, if Apple actually actually cared about adult content in general, they would remove browsers from all their content, lest their users be exposed to an infinite torrent of smut and filth.
- drb91 8y ago> I mean, if Apple actually actually cared about adult content in general, they would remove browsers from all their content, lest their users be exposed to an infinite torrent of smut and filth. You say this like it’s possible. If it were, I’d bet it would ship by default in browsers. In any case, the fact that they have a stake in content at all is a moral choice. They could allow users to install apps through any other way than Apple, but they don’t.
- village-idiot 8y agoIt’s a huge mistake to lump all of Apple’s behavior with regard to their stores into one. They would lose so much money on third party app stores, that this is clearly a fiscal issue for them. You would need a mountain of evidence showing that Apple thinks that’s a moral issue. Their content stores is another beast. While adult content sells, I suspect that Apple believes they can make more money while remaining squeaky clean. This has obvious benefits when selling to parents, but it also makes Apple seem more refined and upmarket compared to an AppStore full of “hot babe” calendars and similar. This is more of a hunch than the previous argument though. The interesting exception is their podcast offerings, where they allow for a lot of sexual content. This also bolsters my suspicions that it’s all financial, since I do not believe that Apple makes much money on podcasts, if any at all.
- cm2187 8y agoI am not familiar with the android app store. Do they have the same restictions? And if they don’t, is it really hurting the brand.
- gordon_freeman 8y agoWould not Apple miss out on hugely popular shows like Game of Thrones or Breaking Bad if it starts filtering out shows that have violence or sex from its original programming? Apple can be successful but it won;t be hugely successful with this strategy like HBO or Netflix in my opinion.
- Krakadero 8y agoDisney seems to be doing fine though.
- gordon_freeman 8y agoEven Disney has Marvel with R-rated movies like Deadpool franchise etc.
- chungy 8y agoDeadpool is part of the X-Men franchise that 20th Century Fox has movie rights to produce. They put the MARVEL logo and appropriate Disney credit in the credits, but that's as far as it goes... it isn't produced by Disney.
- scarface74 8y agoNot yet. Disney isn’t going to drop their adult content when the Fox acquisition is complete.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- forkLding 8y agoThe article mentions that Stranger Things didnt have any sexual content or anything really edgy.
- Bucephalus355 8y agoReally wanted to watch the show Billions, but the opening scene is literally main character’s ( Paul Giamatti) wife peeing on him right after she burns out a cigarette on him during a severe BDSM session. What.
- moetech 8y agoIt's dumb and it's there to pander to an edgy audience, but it really shouldn't be a problem. Why does that scene bother you? Isn't it just because that stuff is taboo?
- crooked-v 8y agohttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgust https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disgust
- moetech 8y agoThat may be all there's to it, but I bet the fact that it's sexual makes all the difference. Do you think Bucephalus355 would have bothered to complain about it if the scene was of a woman puking?
- ummonk 8y agoA) Puking is not anywhere near as disgusting, and you could get equally disgusted by seeing someone peeing on someone else even in a nonsexual context (e.g. hazing). B) Some people can feel elevated disgust towards portrayals of other people being sexual. In that case, the fact that it's sexual does make the difference, but it's still a disgust reaction.
- mclehman 8y agoPoint A is far more subjective than you're making it appear. Personally, puking is far more effective at provoking a reaction of disgust.
- 8y ago
- newshorts 8y agoI’m good with it. In comedy toilet humor is easy. In Movies, it seems shock value is the equivalent. It’s much harder to tell a great story. There are many popular titles that don’t include shocking levels of violence or sex. Just take a look at Star Wars or lord of the rings
- MatekCopatek 8y agoIt's not necessarily about shock value, it can be just about realism. In real life, people smoke, have sex, pick their nose, throw up, swear etc. LOTR can work without this as it's an epic fairy tale that doesn't need deep and developed characters. But if you want to make something like Breaking bad, you're seriously artistically limited by arbitrary ratings. I don't think it's fair to reduce this "sex and violence are unnecessary".
- hrktb 8y agoSex is not just shock value though, the same as toilet humour is not just poop jokes. Here it seems it goes beyond and Apple doesn’t want disturbing content. For instance in these terms I’d expect a blackmirror style social ranking commentary to be refused if it hit too close to home. Or to get back to sex, LGBT subjects including suicide, depression, domestic violence or realistic bullying would also be out. Apple is a small player in entertainment industries, so I don’t care what they value, but I hope every producing company doen’t do the same.
- k__ 8y agolol, for people from the US it probably is the definition of shock value
- slivym 8y agoLet's put the counter to you though - toilet humor is easy. It makes money. It's what allows so many actors and production companies to make a living, and because they're successful they can then go off and make more interesting things and take risks on higher minded ideas. If you run a production company that insists on only producing content that is extremely difficult to make successfully you're just much more likely to end up with a bad investment. Publishing that content isn't just about choosing to back that stuff, it's about making enough stuff that you find the great writers, directors and actors to put together the more difficult stuff.
- PhantomGremlin 8y agoHere's the subhead from the article: The tech giant wants to make scripted shows for streaming, only without violence, politics and risqué story lines That already exists. It's called the Hallmark Channel. My wife likes to watch. I also occasionally watch. At Hallmark the movies are invariably rated G and often end with the romantic leads having their first kiss (after about three interrupted attempts earlier in the movie). I wish that, in at least some subset of the Hallmark movies, the romantic lead characters would "bang it out" at some point in the film. But that never happens. Nor have I ever seen a Hallmark movie with black lead characters. Haven't seen any gay lead characters either. Hallmark is enjoyable. But it's a niche. Apple couldn't make enough money to move the needle by pursuing a niche like that. And how much edgier could they get if they're so worried about their brand? Disney used to use the Touchstone Pictures distribution label for their edgier content. But that now seems to have faded out. Maybe the simplest answer is for Apple to use a different label for the risqué stuff?
- akvadrako 8y agoThere are more alternatives to "violence, politics and risque" than Hallmark. For instance Apple wants to produce a Foundation series based off Isaac Asimov's work. Even Morman TV, which is similarly prudish, has the freedom to create exciting stories, like Extinct.
- w0utert 8y agoI think his point was that apple would invariably end up serving a niche audience. Referring to two other examples of niche programming only reinforces that assertion. Sure you could fill a whole service with programs for a wide variety of niche audiences, but I don’t think it would be very profitable as none of the individual shows will ever attract the kind of audience a show that is not constrained by these kinds of broad-stroke programming choices could attract.
- akvadrako 8y agoHis point clearly wasn't just "it's targeting niches" but "it's a niche like Hallmark". You however might have a point, but as long as it's sometime I'm into, great.
- Nasrudith 8y agoThis sounds like a case of Apple not learning from their own history. Previously their management actively discouraging gaming for a while because they wanted to be business machines and they worried computers were already too whimsical. It isn't an end-all as a niche but the forfeiture is pointless - especially since endearing itself to a young niche as a brand can pay premiums. They wound up left behind anyway since they aren't their customer base anyway and prefer others. IBM got the business market largely. Meanwhile Apple's target while pretty broad certainly doesn't seem concentrated on prudes and stodgy sort but the trendy if anything. I know that slogans tend to be pretty vapid and poorly followed at best but the irony of 'think different' and that sort of mindless conformism to outdated norms is staggering.
- newscracker 8y agoAs a new entrant in this space, I don’t see an issue with Apple being cautious and sticking to non-controversial content. But there are several ways to tastefully include sex and nudity to add to the artistic value of the work without compromising its brand. The same goes with violence, drugs, politics, etc. The English speaking world may be fine with this. But this decision could possibly end up being an impediment to getting more creators and in turn making more money if Apple wants to get into local content beyond English and beyond that world. Different people in cultures may have slightly different views on the well known characterization of porn as “I know it when I see it” (by Alan Novak/Justice Potter Stewart), but what matters more is whether the content fits the context (or sets the context) and is useful to carry the story along. Even people who are more conservative in their views of sex and nudity can distinctly evaluate/classify pornographic movies from non-pornographic movies.
- ummonk 8y agoAlternatively, Apple could succeed in places that tend to be less enthusiastic risqué content than even the US (e.g. China is one of Apple's biggest markets).
- GeekyBear 8y agoIt's interesting that Apple does already sell music with explicit lyrics and R rated movies as well as television content like Game of Thrones and video games with violent content (all labeled with appropriate ratings so parents can use the provided parental controls to exclude them on children's devices). One wonders why it wouldn't be good enough to give explicit apps an accurate rating and go on about your business, given what they already sell. My guess is that this case was more about being wary of what sort of content they produce in house than what they sell.