Discord reverses course on iOS blanket ban of NSFW content

Popular messaging and VoIP platform Discord last week retreated from plans to enact a blanket ban on NSFW servers accessed through its iOS app, a step the company claimed was an attempt to adhere to Apple's App Store guidelines.

Last week, Discord announced a set of restrictions that banned all users from accessing NSFW content on iOS.

The decision was met with blowback from both users and content creators who rely on the platform for revenue.

As noted by Gizmodo, Discord modified its stance on the matter in an about-face that was detailed in a support article last week. Instead of a blanket ban, the company is targeting servers dedicated to explicit pornographic content, including those "organized" around NSFW themes or where similar content is dominant. Further, channels categorized as NSFW are accessible, though users need to verify their age before entering.

A spokesperson for the company issued the following statement to Gizmodo:

Our goal is always to keep Discord safe, especially for our younger users. Last week, we introduced additional controls to ensure minors will not be exposed to content that is inappropriate for them per App Store guidelines. We realize the community had many questions, and we wanted to clarify our position and which servers will or will not be affected. These updates are outlined in detail on our support articles for users and server owners. We will continue to work with server owners and our partners, and will notify all server owners letting them know which of their servers are impacted.

In a statement to AppleInsider, Discord's support team confirmed that the company is adding a new feature that allows servers to identify as NSFW. As for age-gating on iOS, members who want to join an NSFW server will need to opt in on an alternate platform, the company said.

Initially, Discord blamed the content ban on Apple's developer guidelines, saying the policy was put in place "to comply with Apple's policies." The company subsequently told The Verge that Apple was applying pressure to remove adult content from the app.

Latest Exclusives

Latest comparisons

26 Comments

9secondkox2 8 Years · 3148 comments

About 3 years ago

Good on Apple. Get that junk outta there.

But dang, discord!

trying to put Apple and it’s users in a handicapped bad light? Especially when you should have taken measures to protect the innocent and unsuspecting to begin with?

Get it together.

Better late than never I guess.

darkvader 15 Years · 1146 comments

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious. It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right. But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious. It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right. But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

Apple has created a safe haven in the midst of the Wild West as phone tech is concerned.

Epics “case” is simply a matter of Epuc breaching contract and wanting to act like that’s not exactly what they did.

The sad tragedy of Epics stupidity has nothing to do with this.

While I agree that users should be able to load any app of their choosing, it should come with noticeable warning and education concerning the possible outcomes, as well as a process.

Apple shouldn’t have to fix issues caused by malware, malicious apps, etc. so there should be an agreement signed digitally if you do this. And it gets tied to your Apple ID and associated only with that device.

That way Apple doesn’t get to play politics with apps like Parler, etc. and users get back control.

But at the same time, Apple isn’t on the hook for damage done by all the crap out there just waiting to invade your phone.

Nah. Just let them keep guard over the apps. It’s been a great system.

Ms, Sony, Nintendo do this with consoles. And phones are even more important.

Only advertiser spies, and malicious software creators want apples shields torn down. Stay away thanks.

AppleZulu 8 Years · 2205 comments

darkvader said:

Once again, Apple's illegal abuse of their monopoly on app installation rears its ugly head.

As with the Epic case, the solution is obvious. It's past time for Apple's unlawful app store monopoly to be broken.

If you want to remain within Apple's walled garden for all the apps you install on your iPhone, that's absolutely your right. But Apple is abusing their app store monopoly to force everyone with an iDevice into that walled garden, and that is an abuse of their monopoly.

It's past time for governments to step in and force Apple to allow users to load apps from any source of their choosing.

If you don’t want the walled garden you have the choice to buy a different device.

Breaking the App Store would break the entire system. Particularly for the bigger developers, if they can opt out, they will, and with them will go the security and quality protections that the walled garden creates.

I chose iOS devices specifically because I want that system. Breaking that system doesn’t enhance consumer choice. You already have the option to get your open system by buying an android device, so you gain nothing by forcing it on iOS. On the other hand, I would lose my choice, because you’ve broken and taken away the option that I wanted.

So no, it’s not “past time” for you to use governments to take away the thing I want just so you can make it into the same lousy crap as the competitor I didn’t want.

CheeseFreeze 7 Years · 1339 comments

I wonder how long Apple is going to maintain this kind of restrictive behavior. Their excessive walled garden approach going to be harder and harder to defend moving forward, especially with all these antitrust investigations happening.