I really don't understand Facebook.
WARNING: The attached image may be upsetting to some.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
-
LEGO Americana Roadshow: Building Across America I just checked out this traveling exhibition from LEGO and was quite impressed. The scale ... -
Merry Christmas, everyone!
-
When we let politics trump science, people are needlessly put in harm's way. http://arstechnica.com/science/2017/01/self-censoring-fears...
Ah, come on. It’s not Facebook you don’t understand. Forget about what makes sense, forget about what you think: you live in this society, and surely you must recognize that if they’re enforcing “community standards,” that this makes total sense? They removed the image that a lot of people found offensive, and didn’t remove the one that far fewer people found offensive.
ReplyDeleteIt’s not Facebook you don’t understand; it’s the society that finds the top image more offensive than the bottom one. But you know that it does.
This is why “community standards” are bullshit. This is why being “offended” isn’t a real thing that I care about. If you allow that someone being “offended” is something that should silence someone else, then all is already lost—because other people are always, always going to be offended by the “wrong” thing, by your standards.
Republican's running Facebook?
ReplyDeleteHere's one I hope they let stay - really awesome - https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xtf1/v/t1.0-9/12705556_10208918771825676_872297429312413454_n.jpg?oh=a5b5597ac92af4990ad6fa9796099f84&oe=57964869
I went through the training for Google employees and contractors on how to enforce terms of service regarding sex and porn. It was all self-consistent, but it didn't match my personal conclusions. It's hard to automate this.
ReplyDeleteI recently got a telling of on Facebook, for a picture I posted of Melanie Knauss a lesbian porn star, she was not even naked, but laying cuddling another woman. It took 2 hours, from posting to removal. Melanie Knauss became Mrs Trump.
ReplyDeleteSteve S so what is the coaxiality around which terms of service can be reliably enforced? Is there a web page explaining this, because the old "I know it when I see it" clearly isn't very specific ;-)
ReplyDeleteI was going to share my thoughts on this, but because of Jeremy Nixon, my comment would be superfluous.
ReplyDeleteSociety isn't to blame when the business in question acts responsibly. Having manual oversight with clear directives is not difficult.
ReplyDeleteI checked out of Facebook a few years ago because, to me, it lacked interesting Dialogue and Civility.
ReplyDeleteMatt Schofield I don't believe I can discuss these details because it would make it too easy for people to dance right up to the line.
ReplyDeleteSteve S very interesting. OK, here's my take. If it's related to a medieval hagiography about someone being martyred, it's not porn, so blood and guts are just fine. If it's related to any pre-Christian tradition and involves people apparently being comfortable with their bodies or having fun, it is clearly porn, and that includes photos of women shamefully feeding their babies.
ReplyDeleteMatt Schofield Right, any rules can't be based solely on simple criteria like whether various body parts are displayed. There have to be exceptions for things like breastfeeding and art.
ReplyDeleteSteve S my distinction is precisely between sacred and profane art. Sacred art involves blood and guts. Profane art involves anything fun.
ReplyDeleteMatt Schofield Art is art. Pretty hard to make rules depending on the type of art.
ReplyDeleteSteve S my point is that most images are created in a context of two different artistic traditions. Images that tap into Christian traditions of saintly martyrdom, like the unpleasant lower image, aren't considered titillating because they were originally part of sacred art. Images of nudity following profane pagan traditions revived in the Renaissance are considered titillating. Porn isn't very inventive, as the typical porn dialog illustrates. It hits well-known buttons hard.
ReplyDeleteMatt Schofield As a rule, porn avoids the sort of skill and subtlety required for art.
ReplyDeleteSteve S that's not true in the slightest bit. Modern porn involves quite a bit of art from the set design down to the makeup. And don't forget that much of the classic art was porn for the day.
ReplyDeleteSteve Bertolacci Set design? Oh, you mean the house they rented for the day and used as-is? Makeup? Oh, you mean hiding distracting imperfections that might soften your boner? Please.
ReplyDeleteSteve S , you miss all the subtlety if you really can't tell the difference. The really successful outfits have distinctive styles. And distinctive style is just another term for art. And just like anything considered modern art, the acceptance of it is limited.
ReplyDeleteSteve Bertolacci A big part of art is intent. Porn, by definition, is primarily about titillating. It's not trying to invoke anything deeper or more subtle, to communicate anything more profound.
ReplyDeleteArt can also titillate and you're right that classic art has always had some of that mixed in. However, there's a difference between part and whole.
Also, note that I said that it's a rule, not a universal. There are more artistic types of porn out there. They're just buried under a flood of close-ups of moving skin tones.
Steve S , art among many things is about many things, but what defines art is nothing more than something inspiring any emotion.
ReplyDeleteAnd yes, you fail art appreciation class.
ReplyDeleteSteve Bertolacci And you fail porn appreciation class.
ReplyDeleteSteve S real art disrupts the way we see the world. It remakes the world for us. Porn doesn't - it reinforces what we were expecting, detaches us further from the objects we are viewing
ReplyDeleteMatt Schofield Yes, including prejudices. Consider the role of black men in porn.
ReplyDeletePorn is nothing more than what your society considers taboo. In Saudi Arabia, that showing ankles.
ReplyDeleteSteve Bertolacci No, porn is pure titillation.
ReplyDeleteEntities and assets
ReplyDelete