Facebook has been censoring pictures that they think is too "demeaning" to be on the social network site.
Recently, Facebook took down a picture of a girl in a bathtub, where they mistook the girls' elbows for nipples. Now, Facebook removed a picture from Zoo Weekly, a men's magazine.
Zoo Magazine posted a woman cut in half, with the caption "Left or right? But you've got to tell us how you came to that decision." As you can see, the magazine was obviously trying to determine what guys like more, boobs or butts, but in a very crass way that would shock viewers. Buzzfeed writes that the post was censored by Australia's ad watchdog, the Advertising Standards Bureau. The following is a part of their complaint: "The image, disturbing nature of having a disembodied woman and the offensive, clearly sexist and even abusive nature of some responses on a page being used to advertise this product should not be allowed. Both the pictures, the questions that are posed and the responses are regularly demeaning and unacceptable to women. Women are objectified and sexualised."
Except Zoo Magazine is arguing that the post was "editorial," not advertising, and Facebook shouldn't be able to take down editorial posts. As you can see from Zoo Magazine's Facebook page, most of their pictures could be considered inappropriate and demeaning to women.
Unlike the elbow boobs photo, this picture has already been up for weeks. It was initially posted in October. The elbow boobs picture, on the other hand, was only on Facebook for 24 hours before Facebook deleted the post. The picture was actually a test by a Tumblr blog called, Theories of the Deep Understanding of Things, that wanted to determine how "perceptive" Facebook moderators were. I guess they got their answer. Facebook apologized and restored the photo later.
However, when it comes to Zoo Magazines, crass, yet effective, photo (their page has 38,000+ likes), its hard to tell whether or not the picture violates Facebook's policy. According to the user agreement everyone on Facebook signs, Facebook users "will not post content that: is hateful, threatening, or pornographic; incites violence; or contains nudity or graphic or gratuitous violence" and that they will be removed if they "contain nudity, drug use or other obscene content. If the photo attacks another individual or group, it will be removed as well." While the photo doesn't really break any rules, it certainly isn't just another picture on Facebook.
What do you think? Is Facebook being to strict with these photo restrictions? Answer the poll below and let us know your thoughts in the comments section.
Was Zoo Magazine's 'Woman Cut In Half' photo too demeaning?
Yes, but it shouldn't have been removed
No, but it should have been removed
pollcode.com free polls