<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: iTunes Overprotecting Our Sensibilities?</title>
	<atom:link href="http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/2008/10/07/itunes-overprotecting-our-sensibilities/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/2008/10/07/itunes-overprotecting-our-sensibilities/</link>
	<description>iPhone News, Views, and Reviews</description>
	<pubDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2009 13:15:18 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: JoeT</title>
		<link>http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/2008/10/07/itunes-overprotecting-our-sensibilities/comment-page-1/#comment-5796</link>
		<dc:creator>JoeT</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 22:01:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/2008/10/07/itunes-overprotecting-our-sensibilities/#comment-5796</guid>
		<description>Well, I don't want to get into a debate on properly protecting children, but quite frankly I find that much of the content on iTunes isn't fit for young children at all and is a good enough reason to restrict access to it.   I refer mostly to songs, movies, and TV shows with content not suitable for minors.   

By the time our children are old enough to listen to and view these items, they probably are old enough to hear the word "pedophile" - and likely should have already been aware of what a pedophile is ("If someone touches you..."). 

Once you get to the idea that only adults should be on iTunes, then masking "pedophile" seems silly - it's not exactly a four-letter word.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Well, I don&#8217;t want to get into a debate on properly protecting children, but quite frankly I find that much of the content on iTunes isn&#8217;t fit for young children at all and is a good enough reason to restrict access to it.   I refer mostly to songs, movies, and TV shows with content not suitable for minors.   </p>
<p>By the time our children are old enough to listen to and view these items, they probably are old enough to hear the word &#8220;pedophile&#8221; - and likely should have already been aware of what a pedophile is (&#8221;If someone touches you&#8230;&#8221;). </p>
<p>Once you get to the idea that only adults should be on iTunes, then masking &#8220;pedophile&#8221; seems silly - it&#8217;s not exactly a four-letter word.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: ricm</title>
		<link>http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/2008/10/07/itunes-overprotecting-our-sensibilities/comment-page-1/#comment-5788</link>
		<dc:creator>ricm</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 03:29:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/2008/10/07/itunes-overprotecting-our-sensibilities/#comment-5788</guid>
		<description>Maybe the better question (coming from a father of 2 girls) is what's the compelling reason to leave it in? The wonderful human ability to infer a word based on the surrounding context seems to have served you well.

While I'd agree the my children's security  in terms of what they see on the inet is my job, personally I'd rather more websites made errors of exclusion rather than inclusion. I hear far too many stories of what young children are being exposed to at friends homes (who's parents are apparently totally clueless about what can be found on the internet even accidentally.

...Well Susie a pedo... is a very sick person who...

  :)  

Certainly not indicating you would condone kids seeing the garbage the populates much of the internet. Your comment simply struck a chord.


R</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Maybe the better question (coming from a father of 2 girls) is what&#8217;s the compelling reason to leave it in? The wonderful human ability to infer a word based on the surrounding context seems to have served you well.</p>
<p>While I&#8217;d agree the my children&#8217;s security  in terms of what they see on the inet is my job, personally I&#8217;d rather more websites made errors of exclusion rather than inclusion. I hear far too many stories of what young children are being exposed to at friends homes (who&#8217;s parents are apparently totally clueless about what can be found on the internet even accidentally.</p>
<p>&#8230;Well Susie a pedo&#8230; is a very sick person who&#8230;</p>
<p>  <img src='http://justanotheriphoneblog.com/wordpress/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' />  </p>
<p>Certainly not indicating you would condone kids seeing the garbage the populates much of the internet. Your comment simply struck a chord.</p>
<p>R</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
