Feeds

Facebook reviews smut policy after slave site uprising

Deletion of kinky page provokes sort-of soul-search

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

Facebook has announced it is actively reviewing its policy of a total ban on all content relating to sexual activities.

The review follows the deletion on 4 February of Collared Events page following a complaint from a site user. This deletion angered and mystified many members and supporters of Collared, which operates Slaves and Masters Club Nights and which identifies itself as a community non-profit organisation with a focus on safety and socialization. It used the Facebook page merely as a means to communicate.

There was no explicit imagery or sexual content of any kind and the page was set to "secret". The page strictly followed the Facebook Terms. Facebook initially cited its user condition (3.7) that: "You will not post content that: is hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence."

However, following extensive dialogue with senior staff at the company, including Richard Allan, Facebook's Head of Policy for Europe, Collared has apparently stirred Facebook into reviewing not just this ban but its entire policy. A wide ranging "internal dialogue" is now under way.

Simon, who runs Collared, told the Reg: "I feel that Facebook are in complete confusion on this issue. The problem is that their policy is inconsistent and whether a site survives or not depends on whether a site is able to lobby the right person in the company – and not offend the wrong one.

"In this case, we were picked off because a rival club wanted to poach our members".

At base, however, Simon believes that the issues go much deeper, possibly into philosophical territory. He went on: "Facebook have to decide whether they are 'a moral organisation' or are simply pragmatists, seeking to maximise their advertising.

"There is a huge disconnect, which Facebook needs to deal with, because this doesn’t just apply to kink, but to the entire sexuality spectrum. I have spoken to many other groups in the gay and transgender community who are seriously worried that they might be pulled at a moment’s notice: I’ve lost count of the number of cross-dress sites that have lost their pages, even where there is no sexual content whatsoever.

"No one knows whether they should invest huge amounts of time investing in building on Facebook. It is also, partly, a transatlantic issue, with Facebook’s US audience SO MUCH much more sensitive than the Europeans.

"Personally, I don’t care what Facebook decide, so long as they don’t make proclamations about being a platform for the world and then make inconsistent and hypocritical moral decisions.

"Because when Facebook move past a line based on simple content and toward intent and motivation, they are moving into church territory, which I don’t believe anyone wishes them to do."

Over the years, Facebook has often found itself called to task for its alleged inconsistent and discriminatory policies where "sex" is concerned, most notoriously for its heavy-handedness towards groups promoting breastfeeding.

Their Review Team allegedly told Richard Allan: "Any content that is primarily related to sexual activities is deemed to be in breach whether or not the there are any overtly explicit photos on the Facebook page."

This, according to Collared’s promoters, creates two serious issues for Facebook. First there is transparency: if this really is its policy, perhaps it should be stated in the Ts and Cs. Second is the question of consistency.

As regular users of Facebook will be well aware, the site is awash with content that someone somewhere is likely to find "sexual", from Playboy to "Jodie Foster’s thighs": so if this really is Facebook’s policy, it means that increasingly, Facebook Reviewers are to become arbiters of what is and what is not sexual. An interesting and probably thankless task.

We did ask Facebook for official comment on this debate - but have so far received no reply. ®

Beginner's guide to SSL certificates

More from The Register

next story
Phones 4u slips into administration after EE cuts ties with Brit mobe retailer
More than 5,500 jobs could be axed if rescue mission fails
Driving with an Apple Watch could land you with a £100 FINE
Bad news for tech-addicted fanbois behind the wheel
Phones 4u website DIES as wounded mobe retailer struggles to stay above water
Founder blames 'ruthless network partners' for implosion
Radio hams can encrypt, in emergencies, says Ofcom
Consultation promises new spectrum and hints at relaxed licence conditions
Special pleading against mass surveillance won't help anyone
Protecting journalists alone won't protect their sources
Big Content Australia just blew a big hole in its credibility
AHEDA's research on average content prices did not expose methodology, so appears less than rigourous
Vodafone to buy 140 Phones 4u stores from stricken retailer
887 jobs 'preserved' in the process, says administrator PwC
prev story

Whitepapers

Secure remote control for conventional and virtual desktops
Balancing user privacy and privileged access, in accordance with compliance frameworks and legislation. Evaluating any potential remote control choice.
Intelligent flash storage arrays
Tegile Intelligent Storage Arrays with IntelliFlash helps IT boost storage utilization and effciency while delivering unmatched storage savings and performance.
WIN a very cool portable ZX Spectrum
Win a one-off portable Spectrum built by legendary hardware hacker Ben Heck
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Beginner's guide to SSL certificates
De-mystify the technology involved and give you the information you need to make the best decision when considering your online security options.