• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Facebook lifts ban on graphic beheading videos

MysticSang'ha

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
But of course, naked breasts are too graphic. Such is the current point of the ire FB is receiving currently for its decision to lift the ban.

Apparently the decision to share was (and continues to be) a difficult one, with the intent not to protect free speech and distribution of content, but to condemn the violence and other similar acts of violence that occurs in various parts of the world.

"Facebook has long been a place where people turn to share their experiences, particularly when they're connected to controversial events on the ground, such as human rights abuses, acts of terrorism and other violent events," said a spokeswoman.

"People are sharing this video on Facebook to condemn it. If the video were being celebrated, or the actions in it encouraged, our approach would be different.

"However, since some people object to graphic video of this nature, we are working to give people additional control over the content they see. This may include warning them in advance that the image they are about to see contains graphic content."

The firm also disabled the adverts for third-party products that had been appearing alongside the video.
Click to expand...

Did the people in charge at Facebook make the right choice in your opinion?
 
LuisDantas

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Actually, I do agree with the decision. It is important to allow violence to be denounced. There is no particular need to encourage breasts to be seen.
 
Koldo

Koldo

Outstanding Member
MysticSang'ha said:
But of course, naked breasts are too graphic. Such is the current point of the ire FB is receiving currently for its decision to lift the ban.

Apparently the decision to share was (and continues to be) a difficult one, with the intent not to protect free speech and distribution of content, but to condemn the violence and other similar acts of violence that occurs in various parts of the world.



Did the people in charge at Facebook make the right choice in your opinion?
Click to expand...

It got me thinking...
If a video containing lot of nudity was used to denounce against nudity ( on public places ), would it be acceptable by facebook standards?
 
Skwim

Skwim

Veteran Member
Koldo said:
It got me thinking...
If a video containing lot of nudity was used to denounce against nudity ( on public places ), would it be acceptable by facebook standards?
Click to expand...
Good observation.
icon14.gif
 
Kilgore Trout

Kilgore Trout

Misanthropic Humanist
If showing a naked breast somehow served the agenda of demonizing Islam and dehumanizing Muslims, would they then allow it?
 
LuisDantas

LuisDantas

Aura of atheification
Premium Member
Koldo said:
It got me thinking...
If a video containing lot of nudity was used to denounce against nudity ( on public places ), would it be acceptable by facebook standards?
Click to expand...

How long do you expect it would take for people to notice that nudity isn't, you know, dangerous?
 
averageJOE

averageJOE

zombie
The whole point of recording such acts is because they want an audience. Facebook and anyone who watches be-heading videos are enablers, regardless of their reason.
 
Koldo

Koldo

Outstanding Member
averageJOE said:
The whole point of recording such acts is because they want an audience. Facebook and anyone who watches be-heading videos are enablers, regardless of their reason.
Click to expand...

Is that really their intent?
Just any audience whatsoever?

Even the ones who disagree with such an act?
Even the ones who could possibly attempt to prevent it?
 
YmirGF

YmirGF

Bodhisattva in Recovery
averageJOE said:
The whole point of recording such acts is because they want an audience. Facebook and anyone who watches be-heading videos are enablers, regardless of their reason.
Click to expand...
Personally, I see this decision as borderline dementia. There is no good reason to allow the showing of 8 year old's hacking off the head of some poor bugger - with a dull knife - while being egged on by his loving father and a crowd blissfully chanting "Allahu akbar!"

What's next, stoning video's in the spirit of multiculturalism? But... still no exposed boobies? Seriously?
 
MysticSang'ha

MysticSang'ha

Big Squishy Hugger
Premium Member
dust1n said:
Have you seen "This Film is Not Yet Rated"?
Click to expand...

Yes I have. We live in a culture that tolerates violent images, and finds meaning and/or lessons in them, while condemning sexual imagery and discussion. I remember back in my childhood, naked breasts were allowed in PG rated movies (Sixteen Candles, Clash of the Titans, etc.), and therefore not considered vulgar imagery. On the other hand, violent imagery was too much for general audiences (though Poltergeist offered at the time some disturbing images). Heck, "Halloween" when it came out was considered too violent and was given an R rating. That's tame now compared with the imagery in movies with more lenient ratings, but nowhere will you see a naked breast unless it's in an "R" rated film.

While I understand that Facebook is being pro-active in its decision to lift the ban, and not just reactionary, I don't agree with their policies considering what is appropriate for all audiences over 13 and what is considered inappropriate for its members.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top