Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Original poster

To ask my sister to remove photo's of DC's from Facebook

173 replies

Sheeta · 24/06/2009 12:46

At a party and lots of pictures were taken. She's put up photo's of her DD, along with pictures of my DC's onto Facebook. I kindly asked her to take them down, and she has, but now she's really pissed off with me.

Was I being unreasonable? I'm not that keen on the idea of pictures of the DC's online (even if they are friends only pages), and DH is totally against it (he hates the internet).

Is this what happens these days? Is it acceptable for people to put up pictures of your kids on the internet without even asking? I've got pics of her DD, but wouldn't ever dream of uploading them.

Am I alone? Would love the general consensus on this one...

OP posts:

Asana · 26/06/2009 07:51

@ Sheeta YANBU. My DS is now 8wo and I have put 2 (yes, 2!) pictures of him on FB - one of him at 4 days old, one at 7wo. I have had friends calling me asking me to email them photos, wondering why I haven't put up more than 2 pictures of him etc. It is as though it's now the "expected" thing.

Well, I'm sorry, but I don't bow to such ridiculous pressure. I am happy to keep them politely updated but I won't splash numerous pictures of my son all over FB to appease people's rude nosiness curiosity.

I also dislike people posting pictures of MY son (key word being "MY") up without asking me first. I had my best friend and her older sister come to visit when he was born and of course they took pictures of and with him. I later saw that her sister had posted an album up of these pictures. I politely requested that they be taken down and she accepted this with no complaint (well, not to my face anyway). Feel free to show off how wonderful and varied your life is to all and sundry - just do it without involving my son, especially if it's without my permission.

seeker · 26/06/2009 08:16

So it's rude nosiness to want to see pictures of your beautiful baby?

bruffin · 26/06/2009 08:38

As I said seeker, people see their children as possessions like a toy they don't want ot share.

Nekabu · 26/06/2009 09:08

Piss the wrong person off and having pics of your dcs knocking around on the internet (lots of people don't utilise the privacy settings on FB, never mind on other sites) can lead to a lot of unpleasantness. Someone I know fell out with someone who turned out to be a fruitcake and, to get back at her, did it through her dd by:

Creating a website which purported to be the dd's own website, advertising her as an erotic model (using Photoshopped photos that were on social networking sites).

Faked emails from her dd advertising her services as an erotic model who offered 'extras' to clients, with a link to the fake website as well as her real name/addresss/phone number and posted those on every internet group and forum they could find. As I expect you are all aware, most groups and forums archive their posts and they are searchable via search engines.

All the time the parents were trying to get the site down and the posts deleted, they had a load of phonecalls from prospective customers wanting to hire their dd's 'services'.

Of course this is rare but it isn't as rare as you'd hope. I'm not suggesting for one moment that people get all paranoid and don't put photos of their dcs on FB but just that they are a bit careful who they let see them.

SecretNinjaChipmunk · 26/06/2009 09:14

i'm inclined to think yabu. i put up pics of my friends kids (when mine are in with them of course) and the are viewable by friends only and my photobucket account is set to private. whilst i would remove any that they asked me to i would wonder what the fuss is about.

Asana · 26/06/2009 09:23

@ seeker They HAVE seen pictures of my beautiful baby. Two to be precise. To insist or presume that I will add more of him just because 'that's what people do nowadays' DOES smack to me of nosiness. People seem to think it is now their right to view others' lives on a level which I personally find intrusive.

@ bruffin I do not see my son as a "toy" and to insinuate that I do is insulting, to the say the least He is MY son, a young being whom I shall make decisions for and about until he is old enough to wisely exercise those choices for himself.

SecretNinjaChipmunk · 26/06/2009 09:27

unless the account is set to public view in which case yanbu

seeker · 26/06/2009 09:40

Would it be intrusive and nosy to email - as I did to my friend recently - "PLEASE send more pictures of my delicious god-daughter - PLEASE!!!!!"

Turniphead1 · 26/06/2009 09:48

I consider it to be polite to ask if it is ok to post pictures of other people's DC on FB or whatever. I asked my SiL if it was OK with her new baby and she agreed. I don't see the problem in asking.

I do post pics of my DC on FB but have high privacy settings.

Asana · 26/06/2009 09:58

Seeker, she is your goddaughter, which means there is a special relationship between not just you and her mother/father, but between you and the child as well.

I am more than happy to email pictures of my DS to family members and four of my closest friends, two of whom are his intended godparents. Now, friends on FB whom I see sporadically at best and speak to even less - no, thanks! All because we exchange emails 4 times a year and went to school together in the distant past does not equal a "close friendship" nor does it mean you have an indelible right to view online pictures of my son.

anniemac · 26/06/2009 10:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

seeker · 26/06/2009 10:22

bruffin · 26/06/2009 10:51

I walk past the most stunning photograph of a baby everyday in the local photographers.

The baby has a bemused look on her face and is clutching a daffodil. It's a little ray of sunshine and never fails to make me smile.

Thankfully the parents obviously don't the attitude that strangers are not allowed to see photos of the baby or they wouldn't have allowed it to be put in the shop window.

seeker · 26/06/2009 11:00

Maybe the daffodil is a disguised anti-soul-sucking-device?

WildSeahorses · 26/06/2009 11:02

I posted a thread about a similar issue last week. I also cannot quite put my finger on exactly why I don't like having my photo on FB. I suspect it's something to do with the fact that I don't know all of my friends' Facebook friends (or, in some cases, I do know their friends but don't like them) - it seems a bit odd that people who are strangers to me, or whom I dislike, can access pictures of me freely. Profile updates get put into people's news feeds, so people are (I feel) actively encouraged towards them regardless of whether they know the people or not.

I do not buy the argument that photos of strangers will be of no interest to people and therefore will not be viewed. Whereas some people would not bother to look at pictures of people they don't know, I suspect that some people that I know would (or maybe I just know a lot of v nosy people!).

As I am unlikely to know how the people who posted the photos have set their privacy settings (and I would be unaware of any changes to those settings), I will not even be aware of the identity of those people who can see the pictures.

Added together, it just seems like the pictures get to a wider audience than they would do if they were in hard copy. I do not think it is unreasonable to consider the implications of this and I do not think that having concerns automatically makes you some kind of paranoid freak. It is nothing to do with paedophiles. It is to do with my privacy.

flyingcloud · 26/06/2009 11:11

YANBU.

I think SouthLondon put it very well. This is a relatively new phenomenon that requires exploration by people as to what level they feel comfortable with. The possibilities for people to view the photos on FB are endless and the images are digital which again suggests endless possibilities.

I have grown-up friends who have asked me to take their photos of FB, which I have done willingly. It's their image and they don't necessarily want all my friends seeing it and they don't necessarily know what my privacy settings are. Plenty of people I know use FB as a marketing tool and are 'friends' with clients, colleagues, etc. I know journalists who have over 1000 friends, anyone who is a relatively public figure ends up with a huge number of friends too.

Some people are uncomfortable with FB and I totally accept that and do not ask for explanation.

And another thing - kids photos are embarrassing when you're older. Surely some children will, when they're older, regret childhood photos of them on FB. Maybe it doesn't happen now, but I think parents are right to control digital images of their infants.

flyingcloud · 26/06/2009 11:12

We cross-posted! Agree with you, much better put than me.

bruffin · 26/06/2009 11:25

LOL Seeker

anniemac · 26/06/2009 12:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn

Original poster

Sheeta · 26/06/2009 21:49

thank you for all your posts.

OP posts:

blueshoes · 26/06/2009 22:58

Sheeta, I believe SolidGoldBrass spelt "peedafil" in that way as a parody of the ignorance and hysteria that often surrounds shrill accusations of this nature, in the same way a "paediatrician" was mistaken by a baying mob for a "paedophile".

(Not saying that you were making accusations of that nature.)

Mintyy · 27/06/2009 20:11

Yes, SGB obviously was - and that was very silly and patronising of her.

DidEinsteinsMum · 27/06/2009 20:13

YANBU! I did the same to my sister about fb pictures. The use of limited photo permissions and strict viewer policies can make it more comfortable. I still dont like it.

Flip

1 2 3 4 5 6 7