Facebook reviews smut policy after slave site uprising
Deletion of kinky page provokes sort-of soul-search
Ensure Ease of Recovery with Asigra’s Agentless Software
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. ®
COMMENTS
Coherency 101
This article is coherent and balanced, and has informational content.
Most of the replies lack these attributes, plus many indicate very clearly that the author either did not read or did not comprehend the article's content.
Facebook is on shaky ground, as they are enforcing a moral policy, rather than their stated policy. IMHO the stated policy is fine while Facebook's actual behaviour (apparently) is very inappropriate, simply because it is arbitrary and clearly at odds with its clear policy. The "sexual" aspect is largely irrelevant - they are implementing moral arbitration, something I do not believe they are competent to do (if indeed anyone is), and trying to do so is a very slippery slope.
Of course, the sweet irony is that Facebook was founded upon the very premise that it would help people get laid.
/rant
As a non-US citizen, one tires of the endless obsession of US corporations, legislative and judicial bodies, people etc. of trying to eliminate the simple fact that sex exists, in all its gloriious and inglorious forms. The three monkeys springs to mind.
It is very difficult to legislate effectively against sex.
It is very difficult to legislate against pubescent juveniles getting horny, and wanting to do something about it.
It is very difficult to legislate against what consenting adults might get up to behind closed doors.
OK. Canada and Wyoming try, but let's face it. It is a losing battle and the sooner Americans and organizations like Facebook get over themselves and their misplaced prudishness and total denial of the glorious thing that is human sexuality, the better the world will be.
Sexually frustrated individuals are dangerous individuals!
/rant end
Paris: Because she understands the basic premise.
Dweeb
Simple
Most of my clients are small businesses with little or no in-house IT knowledge, and whilst they could get it together to put up a facebook page, even something as "simple" as choosing a web host, choosing some forum software, choosing moderators is going to be something they don't want to spend time on if they can manage it at all.
And you know, it's a lot easier to gain new users (and therefore new customers) on facebook than it is on your own forum.
Can we please stop sneering at people who have chosen different paths in life? Jocks vs Geeks ended when we left school.
collared
if people are too narrow minded about collaring they shouldnt read the material ,i am into bdsm and collering i am a collared slave i have been into bdsm for many years it is a way of life . so if any one thats upset about reading such things why the hell do you read it .you know what it is so why dont you read other articals like gardening and cookery and let like minded people get on with ower lives .............
IT infrastructure monitoring strategies
What you need to know about cloud backup
Enabling efficient data center monitoring
Agentless Backup is Not a Myth
Customer Success Testimonial: Recovery is Everything
