Facebook deletes photo of artful nude pregnant woman on Disney-owned parent-blogging site's FB page
Avert your eyes! Avert your eyes!
This photo was apparently deemed offensive by Facebook, and unilaterally taken down from a page operated by Babble, a popular online site for parents that's owned by Disney, according to Babble.
In a blog post, Babble explains:
Facebook’s community standards specifically state, “We have a strict “no nudity or pornography” policy. Any content that is inappropriately sexual will be removed. Before posting questionable content, be mindful of the consequences for you and your environment.” And today they proved that their definition of nudity is even stricter than ever thought. Earlier this afternoon, a photo of a beautifully adorned pregnant belly was removed from the site because – evidently – it involved unacceptable nudity in the form of a painted breast.Babble’s social media manager, Andrea Zimmerman, posted the photo in question (above) to our Facebook page a few hours ago, and it received several hundred views before it was deleted by Facebook without warning. This has happened once or twice before to photos on Babble’s account, and Facebook has responded by sending a message warning that if their guidelines are violated too many times, the account will be deleted.
I have asked Facebook to comment. Waiting to hear back.
Update, 5:30 pm: A Facebook spokesperson sends along the following comment:
While we can’t comment on individual cases, Facebook has a strict policy around the prohibition of nudity on the site. This mirrors the policy that governs broadcast television, and which places limitations on nudity due to the presence of minors on Facebook.
In the meantime, is this photo -- a giraffe drawn on a woman's pregnant body -- offensive to you? Are there, perchance, other things you see on Facebook that are more offensive, yet never censored?
Just trying to spark a conversation.....
This is an archived version of the technology blog. For updated coverage, see the current baltTech location: baltimoresun.com/balttech












Comments
I thought Facebook didn't allow minors to join, at least in theory.
Posted by: Hal Laurent | February 7, 2012 7:26 PM
Content that is more objectionable on Facebook? Well how about Facebook's censorship and prudery? It is well known that prudery like Facebook's is nothing but child abuse with supposedly good intentions. It is all down to attitudes and the body attitudes associated with prudery are why the USA has such appalling teenage abortion, pregnancy and sexually transmitted infection rates. Young people are dying as a result of body-prejudice.
Posted by: Malcolm Boura | February 8, 2012 3:01 PM