to be angry at facebook response(46 Posts)
I reported a photo on facebook that i saw on facebook. It is a photo of men around a music deck outside. The slogan says "hold on bitch, i need to drop the bass" and the man is pushing the woman's face away.
I found it very bad taste and aggressive towards women. I know it's meant to be a joke but i don't see how that can be funny.
I have just got a respose back from facebook saying that the picture will not be removed
Thanks for your report. We reviewed the photo you reported, but found it doesn't violate Facebook's Community Standard on graphic violence, which includes depicting harm to someone or something, threats to the public's safety, or theft and vandalism.
I complained about it under the violence category as there were no other appropriate headings. I replied saying i was not happy as how can they class a photo where a woman is called a "BITCH" and pushed in the face acceptable?
Sorry but feel so mad with it.
I don't understand what the picture means but I can understand why Facebook wouldn't remove it..
What I don't understand is why you think you can police a site for using misogynistic and aggressive language, swearing, etc.? I mean, even MN... which is far, far away from the media sediment that is Facebook, tolerates posters using (what I consider), really vile language.
I'm FB-free although I have an account. It doesn't trouble my sleep at all because I don't subject myself to it.
I've reported loads of pictures and videos. A few pictures I've reported were MY intellectual property and someone had stole them from my timeline pics. Facebook never respond. You're lucky they got in touch with you, but they don't give a shit.
why would you report something just because you dont think its funny, or just because its bad taste???
I think they have a duty of care to their customers and should have taken action.
I believe they have a duty of care to take immediate action where there is a clear violation of the law.
Where there isn't, I don't see how they can be sheffif, judge and jury without defining lines in the sand that would obstruct fair comment, parody and unfavourable reviews of products and services by users as well until such time as a specific comment gets legally sanctions as within the boundries of the law.
On the basis of what you would like to see, the purveryor of fake holy magic water who turned my corner of rural Italy into picadilly fucking circus would have been able to silence my protest without first having to get a court to sanction it as over a legal boundary. He was already turning my life upside down. Having to let him carry on while I was censored into silence, with the removal of my one opportunity to open the lid on what was really going on and point out the unintended consequences of coachloads of pilgrims decending on us, is not a compromise I would feel comfortable accepting when there are other routes to punish lawbreakers without restricting my ability to make fair comment.
The legal line between proffering an opinion and slander/harrassment/ some other malicious endevour is best left to the forces of order and the judicary. Not facebook, who wpuld be more interested in arsecovering, and consequently set a fixed line so low that fair comment was censored too.
You had access to legal recourse when somebpdy stepped over the boundaries of the law. I would not have had the same had I been censored PRIOR to him being required to seek legal sanction before shutting me up.
And that drove the fucker mad. <bonus point> <one of the few happy moments I had>
A grassroots whispering campaign is one example. Irritating, strange and vindictive buggers pre internet found wierd and horrible ways to damage reputation and make wholly baseless claims.
The benefit of a medium like facebook is that from the very first instinct to be a git ....a papertrail is left.(which is why I was careful to stay eithin the limits of the law rather than waltz staight over it) Knuckles being rapped, or the thought that it could land them in hot water, due to good supporting evidence is far more likely to happen with modern coms than it was with the more cloaked "he said, she said" methods of yesteryear. I think eventually the penny will drop and those more inclined to be morally iffy will return to stratagies of old, but in the meantime those who scribble unfair, unwarrented, unsubstansiated, libelous bollocks all over facebook are a lot more vulnerable to a heavey hand on their shoulder or a costly civil case than those who go for off line and less obvious route.
I really don't want anymore censorship than we already have. DMV wotsitface is already being used by some bloggers to try and close down blogs that justofiably crisitse them. It is not within the spirit of the law at all. But placing a heavey onus on server space providers to react immediately at initial protest rather than risk prosecution has proved a useful tool in the hands of those who would prefer to spout crap and not have to deal with rebuttals.
I totally understand why you were unhappy with what happened and the sense of being powerless to stop it, but unintended consquences of legislation or regulation has to be considered as part of the landscape too.
They seem to manage to find time (and apparent concern) to remove photos of women breast feeding or women showing a nipple or women protesting against the misogyny shown to them, but not pages inciting child abuse or rape.
In the article linked to above it mentions automatic modding, and I wonder if the complainers have (accidently or deliberately) hit upon the right words or phrases to use to make those deletions. In which case, the polite complainers about the actually offensive content might have more success if they can identify those phrases, by trial and error, perhaps.
The other thing that seems to help with deletions is multiple reporting - once there is a critical mass of reports, it looks like automatic deletion might kick in, so organising to report something might help.
Facebook isn't the thought police - even if they did take down this photo, it wouldn't stop the people out there thinking it or perpetuating it. If the moderators can actually stop or prevent crimes from happening, then surely that's where their main focus should lie? And that relies on people not escalating more petty matters beyond the level that they warrant. I am taking that article with a pinch of salt, but have no doubt in my mind that the kinds of things described are posted on Facebook, that they are able to do some good if they can divert their attention towards issues which they at least stand a chance of resolving rather than just ignoring, because that's what removing a photo is, just ignoring it on everyone's behalf, not stopping it from existing. I don't believe that anyone holds beliefs that I would find abhorrent just because they can gain validation from a Facebook page, but I do believe that people act in disgraceful and illegal ways using Facebook in a way which makes them traceable and stoppable. And personally I would prefer their focus to be on the latter.
You are right to be offended. Im really sad that DearJohn wonders what you were offended about. Personally, I dont have time for face book, Im too busy getting on with my life and speaking to people in person when the need arises!
I've seen that picture but the caption was different - "no I will not play gangnam style!"
The caption on yours was pretty vile but I'm not sure if I'd be offended or not.
I can see what you're saying Carpe but a grass roots whispering campaign would have had no effect on us, he was a supplier who lived miles away, our customers are all very local to us. He was able to cause trouble because he was able to do it easily from his own armchair with very little effort.
Even if what you are saying is true, Ebay and Facebook's 'help' was by default, there was nothing active about it. I think they have a duty of care to their customers and should have taken action.
Facebook and Ebay are are unresponsive and a nightmare to deal with over things like this.
On the otherhand, the Facebook and ebay platforms lulled your tormentor into a false sense of security and allowed him to cross a legal line in a manner that provided you with tangible proof and the ability to have him dealt with in a way that was far more effective than not being allowed to share funny cats and naff quotes.
A grassroots poisen pen or whispering campaign would have been a damn sight harder to prove and stop.
I see social media as an elephant trap for the stupid, the criminally stupid and the pain old twisted.
It practically has a big sign over it saying "Look! Trap!!" and they still hurl themselves in it in droves.
Facebook are appalling. We recently had an Ebay seller that we were in dispute with google my husband's email address (after getting hold of it through Ebay) find his business page on Facebook, set up a Facebook profile pretending to be someone else who lived near us and had access to guns etc and then send my DH veiled threats and right untrue and abusive comments on his business page. I reported him to Facebook and Ebay. Ebay never responded, Facebook responded that he hadn't breached their guidelines. The police thought differently, they contacted him and warned him off, they also said that Facebook and Ebay are are unresponsive and a nightmare to deal with over things like this.
and here go post this on your timeline
Give the dickheads a headsup that their assumption that you will find their "humpur" funny is off base. Might even make one or two of them pause for a micro second and think. A long shot, but you never know.
I agree Yaimee, also the 7yo girl being raped by her uncle and contacting FB mods story? Sorry but I don't believe it.
Think of it (the image) and others like them as an early warning system.
When somebody you are connected to posts something like that in a non critical way, delete them not only from Facebook, but your life.
Becuase that is where the real issue lies. Not the image, but the people who create and promote them.
Be grateful that some mysogionists are too stupid to realise their actions basically sit a flashing wailing siren on their head that alerts all interested parties to the fact that they are a dickhead.
Censorship beyond the aboslute worst of the worst takes away the option to shun, shame and rebutt in a highly focused, lazer accurate way.
Peer pressure is by far one of the more sucessful ways to alter behavoir, so rather than waste energy being cross with an immovable facebook admin, take on the person who posted it in your timeline and everybody who liked it.
Post a post about who you defreinded on facebook, and in RL if applicable, and say why.
I reckon if people posted shit and got a number of responses saying "bye bye, but thanks for revealing you were a peabrain and making my friend quality control easier" it would have a more dramtic effect in terms of self censorship and personal examination of belief systemts than facebook running around slapping wrists and getting rid of the odd photo, that will stillbe put there on the internet, just banned from one platform.
That article is shocking
However, there is a lot of shit that doesn't get deleted by facebook (and a lot that does, there are enough complaints about how they delete breastfeeding photos but not a woman's tits out) so you've just got to moderate your own news feed. I never see any of it but I don't have people on my feed who will post shit I don't want to see!
That article is a disgusting piece of propaganda by Facebook, designed to guilt people out of reporting content. Facebook is a multibillion dollar company, if their staff ate struggling with their workload and feel that important issues are being missed and children are being put at risk, Facebook needs to employ more moderators, not encourage users to stop reporting.
I can honestly say I've never seen any of the sort of pictures or videos that you are all talking about on facebook. Perhaps it says something about the type of people you have as "friends" if they think that sort of thing is funny?
OP the photo you mention in your OP isn't great. Obviously.
But getting so upset and wound up about it being on fb is quite frankly not doing you any good. Fb is full of stuff that could potentially offend most of us.
I reckon your best bet would be de-reg.
I have my 15 year old cousin on fb. He liked this video so it popped up on my news feed. Th looked at it, it was 5 girls in pants and t shirts basically lap dancing, grinding onto each other. I'd be surprised if they were over 16. I reported it and straight away got the same 'doesn't violate terms' message.
Sure they weren't naked but they were acting out sexual acts and enjoy bloody young!
Facebook is like a mother in law... smile and nod
haha - yes, so true! I have almost given up commenting on anything on fb altogether recently. Among my 'friends' I have some angry left wing frothers who never let the truth get in the way of a good story, and some bosom-hoiking hang 'em and flog 'em types, who I suspect stand up extra straight and look all misty-eyed when they hear the national anthem.
Someone on here once described me as 'a beacon of good sense floating on a sea of madness' and if my fb feed is a microcosm of real life then she was right. I seem to be the only sane one left.
Facebook is like a mother in law... smile and nod, and get on with your life.
Block/hide who and what you don't want to see.
That article is shit. It is not an excuse to leave up threats of violence against women, threats of rape etc because there is worse out there. They seem to manage to find time (and apparent concern) to remove photos of women breast feeding or women showing a nipple or women protesting against the misogyny shown to them, but not pages inciting child abuse or rape.
I just googled the picture the OP was talking about, and tbh, it could be someone messing about, it could be violent, or it could be set up, FB are right that it doesn't depict graphic violence and it is a big possibility that it doesn't depict violence at all.
I don't really know how it works with regards to sending emails out, I would imagine it would just be a quick click, put them all into a folder then send a mass email out rather than actual individual replies. They probably get thousands of reports about the same things per day so they wouldn't have to look a lot of the time.
With some pictures there would be no arguement that they are offensive and they would be removed, with others it is just down to levels of tolerence and FB are pretty careful about censorship from what I know of them (which admittedly isn't that much because I'm not on it).
I agree with the sentiment of the article though, if you can't handle people saying the odd thing you may find offensive then FB isn't the place for you it has millions of people on it who will all have a different sense of humour so imo if it isn't illegal then it shouldn't really be censored however much I disagree with some of the things I have read about being on there.
My god that article is sobering. After reading that I'm going to have to say YABU, OP, but I do empathise with your annoyance, definitely.
Join the discussion
Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Register now
Already registered with Mumsnet? Log in to leave your comment or alternatively, sign in with Facebook or Google.
Please login first.