Report Claims Apple's Original Programming Efforts Will Avoid Mature Content

[bluecoast]

Would the bloody hacked off arm in StarWars have been too gratuitous though? How about Vader crushing the guys neck? All of these appear to have to pass the Cook test and he is deciding what is too violent or sexy for the Apple crowd.
So far its been miserable marketing BS and the one show they creamed over in 2013 has been determined to violent (odd that given the subject matter).
For all those that want family friendly programming its out there in abundance. For all those that want something a bit more edgy, they are catered for as well. Apple should just stick to shelling out slightly bigger, slightly thinner, more expensive replicants of the iPhone each year, or dumbing down MacOS to iOS if they want to play safe.

Good points, totally.

I’ve defended Apple on some other replies to this thread, but yeah I take your points.

I think that Apple is going to find it hard going being a content publisher, compared to being a content retailer as it does with Apple Music and iTunes.

What is it going to do when someone involved in one of its production ‘misbehaves’? Those Hollywood types are a little more um racier than those suburban Silicon Valley types, right?

I think they’re justified in their commissioning policies, but they’re going to find it tough being Hollywood moguls because of the culture clash.

I suspect that in 2020, Cook will be musing that their must’ve been an easier way to beef up the quarterly service revenues than to have got involved with all of those Hollywood people.

 

[skinned66]

I already get enough Disney without asking for it, thanks.

 

[bluespark]

That's the question? No, it isn't.

This is Apple laying out the law before anyone even attempts to make content. Putting the shackles on ahead of any creativity. Why not wait and see what creative content gets made and then approve it based on its own merit, or reject based on your inane policies?

If you celebrate this decision by Apple, you're completely and hopelessly confused.

Because then you get into censorship, which Apple hopes to avoid going forward. It's much better to be crystal clear about what your expectations and limits are and to work with artists who want to work within those expectations and limits. The *worst* thing Apple could do would be to "see what creative content gets made" (which necessarily requires having already purchased rights to that content) and only then tell the artists their vision must be modified. At that point, the artists are in a Catch-22 as they either must make the changes (which they may strongly disagree with) or lose the project (since Apple owns the rights).

 

[CarlJ]

Apple should hand shows like "Vital Signs" off to a third-party production company - which can have ties to Apple, but not be Apple. Disney did something like this with Touchstone Pictures - Disney kept all their "family friendly" content in-house, and let Touchstone Pictures develop and release the "more mature" fare. Then this new production company can provide those shows back to Apple for showing through their subscription service just like they'll be showing movies/shows from other studios.

Few people got riled up about movies from Touchstone to the extent of protesting against Disney, instead, they continued to see anything with an actual Disney label on it as still being "wholesome entertainment for the whole family". Apple could do similar.

 

[petsounds]

I still remember that not long after Cook became a full CEO, the Messages autocorrect started obstinately correcting the word f***ing as "ducking", no matter how many times you rejected that correction. I can't be sure that was his decision, but it sure seemed that way.

I think a "family friendly" TV service may work well in some conservative areas, but overall I think this is not a good decision on a purely business level. Imagine if a movie studio only produced G-rated content. Even Disney doesn't do that.

 

[techwhiz]

So I might as well watch Nick TV?

 

[niun]

tell the artists their vision must be modified.

a series made by M. Night Shyamalan about a couple who lose a young child. However, Apple executives reportedly pushed for changes in the show because they didn't want content to venture into religious subjects or politics.

Allegedly they're already doing this. Not to mention the show creators that have already jumped ship due to the Apple shackles.
When every other production house out there allows total creative freedom, what has Apple got to offer apart from $$.

 

[shareef777]

Boring. Another reason not to subscribe.

For a subscription service to survive, it needs a variety of content, not just ‘family friendly’. It will get boring. Apple are not the next Netflix, who had enough content to cater for all.

Exactly. My thought is that I'll be subscribing to the Disney service for my kids as they have plenty of kid/family friendly options, but even more so that they have the entire Marvel Studios catalog for entertainment that can also cater to adults.

 

[00sjsl]

I like this. I can't watch a lot of newer content because it's too violent. Apple have spotted a hole in the market.

 

[millerlite]

Not interested. Why pay for Apple shows when you can get Netflix, Hulu, HBO Now, etc. which has family programming and more mature stuff? This will never get off the ground. Bad choices by people who aren't creative types will doom this. Just look at the few things they've already tried to get off the ground - Carpool Karaoke and a reality show about making apps? Pathetic.

 

[whyamihere]

Makes sense. After all there's no sex, profanity, or violence in the real world. -puts blinders back on-

 

[niun]

Apple have spotted a hole in the market.

I think Big Bang Theory and other totally mundane shows beat Apple to that market over a decade ago.
Mayhaps a Friends remake would be their ideal show. Just a little cheeky and a good way to market iPhone, iPad, AppleTV, HomePod etc...

 

[HiRez]

I end up buying just about everything Apple puts out, hardware, software, or services. But it looks like they won't be getting any $$$ from me for their video content packages. Stupid decisions IMO, I'm sure certain groups will like it but I think it's really going to hamstring them as a mass-market product, which, let's face it, is the only type of product that's important for Apple these days.

 

[lazard]

If Apple wants to stick with PG content, that's fine. It's their prerogative.

 

[Tech198]

Apple choosing not to associate for everyone, they'll loose that % of viewers, even the occasional viewers..

They have no problem with this in music.. It's just they choose not to, got nothing to do with they wanna distance themselves from others. If that were true, it would be throughout.

 

[spotlight07]

Apple could be highly innovative with ratings. The whole point of owning the entire stack as is the case with Apple, is to be able to create experiences no one else can do. Rather than censor all the productions, they should find a technological answer. They could have multiple cuts and a setting for the rating the user wants. Watching with your kids? Set it to PG. Watching with your significant other, set it to R. Don’t like violence but you’re fine with profanity? Turn down the blood/gore and allow the swear words.

 

[mrongey]

Steve wouldn't have been troubled by drug use.
[doublepost=1537829078][/doublepost]

To those who think that this is bad news:

Would The Empire Strikes Back have been better if it had showed Han And Leia having sex?

Or a more gruesome torture scene for Han?

Or maybe a nastier scene when Luke has his... (redacted in case there are still people in the world who haven’t seen this movie!)

It’s really possible to tell great stories and be restrained about what you show and still produce scenes that are funny, touching - and shocking.

Except Timmy apparently isn't comfortable with weapons so all of Star Wars would be off the table.

 

[PastaPrimav]

You are aware that this refers only to Apple's own streaming service, yes?

This doesn't in any way prevent Netflix, Amazon, and others from streaming other content, just like they're already doing.

For now, you mean.
[doublepost=1537835194][/doublepost]

With all due respect, that’s not how it works.

Every single streaming service or tv channel commissions shows depending on what their commissioning policy is (which is derived from their ‘brand’).

Netflix’s brand is personification (so they say), so you see a wide range of content of that service.

Fox News it’s fair to say is right wing. They’re probably not going to commission Michael Moore to make documentaries for them! So it’s probably a lost cause to ever complain to them that you’d like to see more left wing liberal programming on their channel. It’s not their brand. It’s not what they do.

Apple’s brand is empowerment, creativity, inclusivity and is family friendly. So it’s not surprising that their content is going to reflect those values. Likewise it’s probably not going to be worth it to ask them to produce something like ‘Altered Carbon’ or ‘GoT’.

I think that in 2018 there’s a huge amount of outlets for creative people who can package up and execute an idea, more than ever.

Apple only choosing to commission programming that adheres to its values, doesn’t mean that more edgy things aren’t going to be made - you’ve got HBO and Netflix for that, or you can even self distribute on platforms like Vimeo or YT.

In the end, we all don’t have to pay for Apple’s content, if we don’t agree with their commissioning policies. It’s great to have choice as consumers.

What choice? When creates the entire platform, and then starts creating content on that platform, where is this "choice" you pretend exists? It doesn't. That's a lie. Apple is a platform. They have no business venturing into original content. In a few years, theirs will be the only original content you're allowed to watch.

 

[Abazigal]

I end up buying just about everything Apple puts out, hardware, software, or services. But it looks like they won't be getting any $$$ from me for their video content packages. Stupid decisions IMO, I'm sure certain groups will like it but I think it's really going to hamstring them as a mass-market product, which, let's face it, is the only type of product that's important for Apple these days.

If it’s bundled into Apple Music directly, we might just end up getting it anyway, whether we intend to watch it or not.

 

[niun]

If it’s bundled into Apple Music directly, we might just end up getting it anyway, whether we intend to watch it or not.

That does seem like the Apple way. If they nudge the cost one penny over the current charge, I'm out.

Anyhoo, Apple Music is without a doubt the best place for TV streaming

 

[Abazigal]

That does seem like the Apple way. If they nudge the cost one penny over the current charge, I'm out.

Anyhoo, Apple Music is without a doubt the best place for TV streaming

If only because it’s the only music streaming service available on my Apple TV.

 

[jeremiah256]

It's a smart business move when you know you are not going to be a dominant content provider for the foreseeable future. And it's not like they're planning on airing reboots of the Teletubbies 24/7. There are some dramas and documentaries thrown in. And who isn't going to at least take a peek at their Time Bandits and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series?

 

[chatin]

Taylor Russell was unimpressed by the size of Cook's clicker.

 

[HiRez]

It's a smart business move when you know you are not going to be a dominant content provider for the foreseeable future. And it's not like they're planning on airing reboots of the Teletubbies 24/7. There are some dramas and documentaries thrown in. And who isn't going to at least take a peek at their Time Bandits and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series?

Take a peek at is different than pony up extra money for though. Am I interested/curious in what they produce? Absolutely. But my credit card bill has what seems like a never-ending list of monthly subscriptions these days. I'm interested in Star Trek: Discovery but I'm not going to sign up for CBS's streaming service because that alone isn't enough to take the monthly charge for, and I suspect Apple's service will be the same thing if they follow this "family friendly" path they're on. If there's not at least 4-5 shows I know I'll watch, I'll pass.

 

[niun]

their Time Bandits and Isaac Asimov's Foundation series?

Holy cow I'd forgotten about that. Errr me for one. Some decent and original might peak my interest but rehashing a classic film as a TV series is just terrible. I also don't trust Apple's PC approach with anything.