Facebook responds: Shock at obscenities, no policy change

Greg says:

12:47pm | 26/02/10

Do you think that communication of an electronic type isn’t monitored or stored somewhere without your knowledge?

pabz says:

05:54pm | 26/02/10

>greg

he didnt actually say that did he?

he just asked if there was an expectation.

TB says:

07:16pm | 26/02/10

Of course he doesn’t, Greg - Grant is simply calling for a modicum of sanity in this brouhaha (which has sadly been absent). In my observation of the coverage of this farce in the media I’ve seen a whole lot of outrage from what I call the “Faux Free Speech Brigade” - those who think so-called free speech is fine as long as it’s speech they agree with and find unoffensive, i.e. their speech (a viewpoint I find most offensive, but I’m not going to campaign to have their voices muted). I think incidents like this cast much-needed light on the sicknesses so prevalent in our society, sicknesses which run so deep it’s ludicrous to think that changing some website policies will do anything to address them.

On another note, I find Debbie Frost’s description of these events as “unprecedented” to be a ****ing joke. Does she even USE Facebook? Did she just start working there? Page vandalism, account vandalism and outright account theft aren’t exactly unheard of phenomena.

Jack says:

11:58am | 26/02/10

An ‘emergency number’?

Dear Facebooks, I have an internetemergency! Someone was mean to me on the twitterspace!

Yeah, I see that happening.

Shar says:

03:37pm | 26/02/10

Jack, learn how to read. 

It says “emergency contact”... which can mean online help or email contact.

Jack says:

03:52pm | 26/02/10

Regardless, it’s a stupid idea. They have a way to report inappropriate content already… but now they should have another, superspecial way to do the same thing?

This is almost as awesome as the ‘internet panic button’ that was being pushed by some family group a few weeks ago.

FFS, supervise your kids if the internet is so scary.

Shar says:

04:09pm | 26/02/10

Jack, unlike you, I don’t think that child pornography is something to make light of.  And whilst the content is reported, it isn’t removed fast enough. 

I don’t know if you saw the images posted onto the RIP Elliot Fletcher page last week, but I did, and they were incredibly disturbing and upsetting.  I personally searched Facebook’s help pages to try and find some way of having these images removed more quickly, but to no avail.

So yes, to sum up, I do think that there should be a “superspecial” way to report illegal images of child pornography and abuse and frankly, if you don’t, I don’t really care.

Luke Smith says:

05:58pm | 26/02/10

Shar: Did you actually use the REPORT button?

Shar says:

06:23pm | 26/02/10

Yes Luke, of course I did.  However, the troll/s were posting the same or similar images every few minutes because of course there were no admins to block them.

Shar says:

06:29pm | 26/02/10

Furthermore, Luke: did you read the post you responded to?  It clearly states that “And whilst the content is reported, it isn’t removed fast enough”! 

What is it with comments on this site, people don’t read posts, or if they do, they don’t comprehend them…

Joe says:

12:33am | 27/02/10

Shar Facebook has 400 million members, can you imagine how many reports they receive from people each day or even every minute?  While they obviously have to then go and assess the material to make a decision whether to remove it, all of which takes time.  If as you say the offenders were making repeated posts every few minutes, do you think Facebook staff would of been able to keep up in removing the offensive material, just as quickly?  It is after all a free service and I doubt they have huge numbers of staff sitting around, just waiting to deal with a situation like this, particularly given the timezone difference between here and the US.

Really you shouldn’t blame Facebook, they merely provide a service and aren’t responsible for other people’s action.  In fact it was the administrators of the group, who made a public group that opened up a very personal tragedy for all of those 400 million members to comment, including those who posted this offensive material.  Sooner or later, someone was going to say or do something stupid, it is simply the way people are and there has always been people in this world who seek to cause trouble and offense to others.  Without a doubt, there is quite a few of those found amongst the 400 million users of Facebook.  If the administrators had kept the group private instead, which probably would of been more appropriate considering the circumstances, this never would of happened.

While if you think any web host is willing or happy to host child pornography, you are very much mistaken.  If any web host do not act to remove child pornography once they are informed, they become guilty of a crime themselves.  Apart from being perhaps the most offensive material found on the internet, it also has the most serious legal consequences being illegal around the world and of course leads to the involvement of the police or other authorities.  It is highly likely after the first report, they were immediately in contact the FBI (the relevant authority in the US), handing over the evidence and IP addresses of those who posted it, in order to identify those who posted it and to allow the offenders to be prosecuted.  However again, this is not instantaneous and would take time for the staff to do this.

Although if you want an emergency contact number, for a company in America, are you willing you pay the international charges involved in calling them and most likely end up with Facebook charging to use their site, in order to pay for this service, which after all would have to be available 24 hours a day and in every language spoken by Facebook users around the world?

Kirsty says:

01:12am | 27/02/10

Shar how about an emergency button removing annoying RIP pages. If its such a problem people shouldn’t make one up. No one else but family and relatives wants to see it! If you dont want randoms looking and making obscene comments dont let non-invites join. simple!

Then we dont have to hear about all you people complaining about the horrors of people posting mean comments about the horrors that you bothered to make a page about.

Moss says:

01:25am | 27/02/10

Someone sent me a threatening letter in the mail. Where is the Australia Post emergency button!

Shar says:

10:39pm | 27/02/10

Kirsty & Moss: We are talking about child pornography here, not “mean comments” of which I couldn’t give two hoots about.  Read.  Comprehend.

Joe: As stated a number of times, the request is for an emergency contact not a telephone number.  Read.  Comprehend.

You really are a simple bunch lol!  Why not look at solutions - or is that simply too hard for you lot?!  The “emergency contact” could simply be a prioritised option of the current reporting function.  An option that specifically identifies the offending photo as child pornography so that it can be dealt with more promptly.

Trish says:

02:05pm | 02/03/10

Shar the emergency contact is the police. If an illegal act is committed you call the police.If someone sends you child porn in the mail or a death threat you call the police, not your postie. When crimes are committed it is the only agency that we as a community trust to deal with these matters. The appropriate authorities can then investigate fully.

Did you call the police? or too lazy and couldn’t be bothered?

Gary says:

02:09pm | 02/03/10

Yep, Click “Report this photo”. Read, Comprehend!
Why should they have a 24hr telephone operator? call the cops if thats not good enough. geez

Jack Thomas says:

10:57am | 26/02/10

Sorry to burst your bubble Julia, but Facebook was set up to make money, like any other business.

In 2004, Peter Thiel met Harvard student Mark Zuckerberg and invested $500,000 to establish Facebook as a business. Peter Thiel is an American entrepreneur, hedge fund manager, libertarian and venture capitalist. With Max Levchin, Thiel co-founded PayPal and was its CEO. He currently serves as president of Clarium Capital, a global macro hedge fund with more than $2 billion under management, and a managing partner in The Founders Fund, a $275 million venture capital fund he launched with Ken Howery and Luke Nosek in 2005. He sits on the Facebook board of directors. Thiel was ranked #377 on the Forbes 400, with a net worth of $1.3 billion.

The ‘good intentions’ were not evident when its developer Mark Zuckerberg took $1.4 billion from the sale of just 1.6% to Microsoft.

Grant & SLF, I disagree. The responsibility of Facebook to the public is no different to any other media, or citizen. They live within a society that has laws and accepted norms of behaviour.

To claim because this is online it should be just open slather for anything suggests that we should not have any laws anywhere, we should all just be allowed to do or publish anything.

Facebook and its online friends can’t have it both ways.

If you want to live and operate within our soceity, make money out of publishing information, selling advertising, to list your company on the stock exchange, or otherwise live within our society’s rules and protection, then you must accept some regulation.

It seems to me like the footballer who takes the fame and millions of dollars in sponsorship etc, but then whinges about having to live within our accepted standards of behaviour, not being able to get drunk and assault or gang rape girls, etc. Or the muppets who whinge that part of their tax should not go to a certain thing.

Just like any other form of media, if you allow it to be published you must accept some responsibility, even if that is only acting to withdraw it promptly. If you publish something that is clearly illegal then you lose the right to privacy from being investigated, just like anyother crime.

The whole new media debate assumes we are a new society as well, or that the new media should dictate how soceity operates rather than the other way round.

People who think that way can go live on a self contained island with their paedo mates posting kiddie p0rn and other grossly offensive content to each other.

Zeta says:

11:44am | 26/02/10

@ Jack Thomas - You neglected to mention the second round of Facebook venture capital funding for Facebook, the $12.7 million from venture capital firm Accel Partners and its manager, James Breyer; former chairman of the National Venture Capital Association who served on the board with Gilman Louie, CEO of In-Q-Tel, a venture capital firm established by the Central Intelligence Agency in 1999 to invest in data mining technology. In-Q-Tel had previously provided start up capital for PayPal, and thus the circle is complete.

Just saying.

matt says:

12:41pm | 26/02/10

Jack you also neglect to mention that Zuckerberg stole the idea for Facebook from some fellow students - who he later had to pay a $65 million settlement to…(http://www.networkworld.com/news/2009/071309-facebook-book.html)

Just saying, morality on Facebook?

julia says:

03:00pm | 26/02/10

@ Jack: it was set up to help college/university students get in touch with people from their home towns. It started as an electronic replica of some sort of directory many colleges have in the US.

It’s become a moneymaker because its a good idea and socially allows people to stay in touch.

Trust me. I’m a stay at home mother and I haven’t gone mad and I attribute it to the fact I can stay in touch with people I don’t see every day.

But I’m cautious and what’s happened with the murder in Bundy is a warning to anyone who makes a new friend on FB. Protect your kids. Protect yourself.

cam says:

04:15pm | 26/02/10

@julia that’s funny, cos i always thought it was so mark zuckerberg could meet chicks. #revisionist

Clay says:

01:15am | 27/02/10

You have been misinformed Richard. Facebook was actually created to slag out dead kids.

Observer says:

12:58pm | 26/02/10

Printed material, regardless of format, still attracts defamation (slander and libel). Whatever makes you think it should be excempt?

marley says:

02:06pm | 27/02/10

Observer - yes,  printed material or indeed spoken material, can attract defamation suits - but you’d sue the author or speaker of the defamatory comment, and, if appropriate,  his employers.  You .wouldn’t sue the company that makes the printing press for a libellous comment or the one that provides the telephone line for a slanderous one.  So why should you sue the vehicle, which in this case is Facebook?

Nikki says:

01:37pm | 26/02/10

Well done, your ‘default anti-Abbott vote’ will re-elect a PM whose intent is to impose Chinese style restrictions on free speech.

It’s amazing how many people think their freedom of speech is restricted under conservatives but will vote for socialism whose various regimes have included such glowing examples of freedom as the USSR (Union of Soviet Socialist Republics) and Nazi (National Socialist) Germany.  Learn some history, people! Freedom of speech has flourished more under free market small government conservatives than under the left.

Jack says:

02:00pm | 26/02/10

It’s amazing how many people throw around the term ‘socialist’ as a synonym for ‘the government did something this one time’.

But yeah, conservatives have a *way* better track record when it comes to freedom of expression. Sedition laws? Bah. Johnny was just protecting us from the terrists!

Nikki says:

04:04pm | 26/02/10

No Jack, I’m referring to socialists and over generations, not just the term of one government. They always go this way in the end. Water finds its own level.

casey says:

01:18am | 27/02/10

Nikki, look up socialism, now smack yourself in the forehead, thankyou.

Julie Coker-Godson says:

02:21pm | 26/02/10

Rubbish Harquebus, absolute rubbish!  Children as well as adults alike are entitled to enjoy the benefits that this technology provides as I said yesterday.  Nowhere since its inception has there been anything to state that the internet is “adults only”.  Schools are entitled to have the internet for their pupils and it is a learning tool as well not just a publishing medium by which people can rant and rave about whatever obnoxious subject they please.  As stated in previous posts, there are libel and defamation laws in this country and why should posts on the internet, wherever they crop up, be exempt from the law “because its the internet, Your Honour”.  Like I said:  Rubbish!

Jack says:

02:57pm | 26/02/10

Julie, I suspect you dont know what libel or defamation are…. they certainly dont cover what happened. At all.

Also, protip: libel is a type of defamation. the term you are looking for is ‘slander’. Or possibly, in your case, PIN number or ATM machine.

Julie Coker-Godson says:

06:26pm | 26/02/10

@Jack:  Defamation covers the spoken word (slander) and the written word (libel).  Defamation is to speak or write something maligning and untrue about an individual which lessens that person in the eyes of others to the extent that that individual suffers a loss of reputation and credibility in the eyes of the community causing that person humiliation, hurt and even economic loss e.g. they might lose their employment, be ostracised and ignored and shunned from contact with fellow members of society.  I did not say this is what happened in this case, I simply take Harquebus to task for saying that the internet is only for adults. I ask why that should be so?  It is also a learning tool that is very useful for schools e.g. think Geography or History just for starters.  I find it a wonderful place for myself as well as for others (children).  It is a great shame that there are those in society who would ruin it for the vast majority who do the right thing.

Charlie McCarthy says:

02:10pm | 26/02/10

No. What Debbie Frost is suggesting is that there’s no bigger sickos in the world than Australian sickos. Hey, we’ve got to win at something.

But then you reap what you sow and this sort of perversion has been a couple of generations in the making thanks to the slow crushing of civility and the rights of the majority under the heel of social re-engineering and the rights of the individual to say and do exactly what they feel like doing, whenever they feel like doing it and ‘if you don’t like it, don’t look’.

Julie Coker-Godson says:

02:34pm | 26/02/10

What a charming attitude Jonathan Bahr - not.  Selfish too.  So long as you can do what you want to do, whenever, and regardless of who it offends then its ok with you.  Well I’ve got news for you sunshine, it is not ok and never has been and I am a lot older than you.  I use just about every facet of the internet and facebook but I don’t feel the need to put offensive/insulting/degrading/depraved/pornographic comments/images online just for the hell of it.  And what’s this “...the online culture amongst the under 30s who have grown up online"bit?  Excuse me, but I grew up online and I’m 20 years older than you at least.  The internet does not belong to any one group of people of certain ages, how arrogant of you to think that it does.  I hope you’ve got a lot of money Jonathon in case one of your trolling efforts lands you in hot water for either a) defamation b) libel c) publishing offensive material. Anonymity will not save anyone either, as there has recently been a case decided where a person was tracked down and convicted. The case has been mentioned on The Punch in the stories on the right hand side of the home page on Thursday’s edition.

marley says:

04:48pm | 28/02/10

Johathan Bahr - if you’re not offended by child pornography, then it is you and not the over 30s who have a problem.  Or perhaps your reading skills are such that you didn’t get that point?

Mosaid says:

01:44am | 27/02/10

People should just be encouraging all those that don’t like being “sold communication”, to log off the internet (not the WWW) and to not rely on “commercial” media for “correct” information!

Grant says:

05:10pm | 01/03/10

Wrong.

Facebook is not a news site.

Can we get this cleared up for everyone who thinks it is.  The laws regarding published media do not apply to facebook.  The specific controls relating to broadcasting are contained in the Broadcasting Services Act 1992 and the Newspapers and Printing Act.

Now, for example:

If I receive in the mail a pornographic picture or a written document that has illegal material written on it.

Should I:

A.  Contact Australia post and ask why they didn’t opn the mail addressed to me and check it before they sent it to me to make sure I didn’t receive offensive material.

B.  Contact the police and supply the material to them to investigate.