Facebook and Controversy
Decapitation videos going into news feeds that can be viewed by anyone, including young people, often as young as 8 or 9, cannot be savory or healthy. Facebook finds itself, once again, in the middle of a controversy regarding it's position on the content posted on it. How far can freedom go? How far must it be allowed to go?
My concern is overwhelmingly for the impressionable young minds who are increasingly becoming addicted to Facebook and the platform is used by children of a very young age. The luster of Facebook connections has obliterated our sense of responsibility to developing minds and created a monster we may sooner or later find ourselves powerless against. In this case, it appears Facebook had a change of mind after the furor that followed the posting of graphic, violent videos. But only after.
It had said people had a right to depict the "world in which we live".
But the US's Family Online Safety Institute (Fosi) said the violent nature of the material had "crossed a line".
"Personally and professionally I feel that Facebook has got this call wrong," said Stephen Balkam, the organisation's chief executive, ahead of the U-turn.
Charities in the UK had also called on the social network to reconsider its stance saying the material could cause long-term psychological damage.
I don't think anything violent should be depicted on a social forum as wide-reaching as this and as open to all age groups as this, John! So, no, it is not okay to show someone on fire or shot 10 times, or anything that can psychologically damage and emotionally disturb minds.
While I know that it is inevitable that ghastly images cannot be completely concealed from our youngsters, BF, I hope, at the very least that parents are part of the discussion when they are shown. There are enough movies depicting, through fiction and historical fiction, disturbing beheadings and other brutal acts, why they should make their way into a social platform like Facebook, often real images of the horrific acts in our time, is something I have a very hard time with.
Who determines what is psychologically damaging?
Who is the arbiter of that distinction?
Who determines where a child can and cannot go?
If parents are concerned that their children might see something that the parents don't wish for them to see, and the parents think that their children might be seeing something on a website, then the parents shouldn't be letting their children go to that website. It is the parents responsibility toknowwhere their child is and goes, that responsibility does not decrease when their child is online.
I have a gut adverse reaction to any group that is set up for the protection of some social construct, because they are invariably against some expression of free will.
With all of that said, I really don't think that a space as accessible as Facebook should have content such asbeheadings, but Idon'tthink that we as a societyshouldbe able to censure such material, either.
The duty is upon the parents, not the owners of the sites, to police the childrens action's.
Brolly, I agree and disagree with you. I agree that parents are the ones, first and foremost, responsible for protecting and guiding their children. No question about that. BUT I also believe that society as a whole bears a degree of responsibility - schools, for example, and media. Access to media, particularly online has become much easier for all. Freedom of expression, of speech, of material displayed is fine, however, just as we know that exposure to certain types of content is not appropriate for all age groups and have ratings for movies and such, a site such as Facebook, which is used by a wide variety of people of all ages, has to bear in mind that it carries a degree of that responsibility. If a site is accessible to children, it carries a greater degree of responsibility. Or, it should simply not permit them to open accounts below a certain age. But Facebook does.
Facebook, aside from being a massive con job of stealing your personal information for their own profit, isn't the only place kids can view this kind of stuff. For those of you a bit behind the times, sites such as 4 Chan that have been posting this kind of stuff for at least a decade now.
I guess I am one of those a bit behind the times, AeonPax! I was not aware of 4 Chan until you mentioned it. I know there is a vast jungle out there and things like this are everywhere, but Facebook is probably the "go to" site for every youngster as soon as they are "permitted' to open an account.