User blogs
So more bullshit from Facebook. The latest news from the official Church of Satan page made me lolololololol. Some gallery owner was temporarily suspended from Facebook for posting William Mortensen art, including the pictures of the nudes, which the Facebook team considered indecent and diligently removed them from the guy’s page. There would be nothing extraordinary in it as the Facebook moderation policy is rather shitty if it wasn’t for the guy’s reaction.
The incident has been covered on Disinfo, Lexicon Magazine, Church of Satan News Page and the official Facebook pages. Surely, having your stuff removed from Facebook and being banned for a week is such an important event in your life that one at least should dedicate an article and an interview to that. So here there comes the freaking comedy:
Satan, Totalitarianism in America, and how an Art Gallery got Banned from Facebook.
The article begins with stating the relevant Facebook Terms of Service:
“We remove photographs of people displaying genitals or focusing in on fully exposed buttocks. We also restrict some images of female breasts if they include the nipple…
Lol, do the table and piano legs have to be covered too? Moving on…
…but we always allow photos of women actively engaged in breastfeeding or showing breasts with post-mastectomy scarring. We also allow photographs of paintings, sculptures, and other art that depicts nude figures.”
It seems Facebook team of dumbasses doesn’t know what qualifies as art. It’s not the first time the gallerist is banned from Facebook and his Mortensen pictures removed. I only wonder why he keeps posting that stuff over and over again knowing that it will be removed. However, it’s more interesting what he goes on to say in the interview:
It’s completely totalitarian in my view. How crazy that a corporation sets the moral standard and acts as judge and jury and executioner, this is not in the interest of it’s users. This is the part that really bothers me, the implications of handing over what is in it’s spirit and essence a right protected and guaranteed as constitutional Amendment to Facebook via a user agreement…
He’s referring to the Sixth Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Which reads:
In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the state and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.
I laughed my ass off. Of course, every Facebook denizen has a right to a public and fairly objective trial before being banned. I only wonder who should serve as the jury? Moderators? Facebook denizens? Who should be the judge? Zuckerberg himself?
So, what i am annoyed with, and question highly is where does Facebook get it’s sense of self entitlement, to the extent that it can conduct it’s operations in contradiction to a constitutional amendment? Does it think it’s user base is SO DEPENDED UPON IT THAT IT WILL GIVE UP CONSTITUTION RIGHTS TO STAY WITHIN THE SOCIAL NETWORK?
So… Banned from Facebook? Here is a simple solution to your problem, people:
Sue the motherfuckers!
They have no right to restrict your freedom of speech, which is guaranteed by the Constitution. Posting the pictures of bare buttocks wherever and whenever you want is your basic human right, which you should defend till you drop dead. If Facebook doesn’t want to give you a fair trial, go to the court of law, hire a lawyer no matter the price and fight for your freedom. Don’t give up cuz the State is on your side, taking care to enhance your civil liberties especially now that the Islamic terrorist bastards are threatening our beloved democracy.
