Facebook: Hanging around? Where does democracy stand?

Only if its Mark Zuckerberg himself in the video...

"Facebook has long been a place where people turn to share their experiences, particularly when they're connected to controversial events on the ground, such as human rights abuses, acts of terrorism and other violent events," said a spokeswoman.

"People are sharing this video on Facebook to condemn it. If the video were being celebrated, or the actions in it encouraged, our approach would be different.

"However, since some people object to graphic video of this nature, we are working to give people additional control over the content they see. This may include warning them in advance that the image they are about to see contains graphic content."

"David:  Have you seen Duke Fame's current album?

Ian:    Um... yes, yes.

David:  Have you seen the cover?

Ian:    Um... no, no, I don't think I have.

David:  It's a rather lurid cover, I mean...ah, it's,

it's like naked women, and, uh....

Nigel:  He's tied down to this table,

Ian:    Uh-huh.

Nigel:  And he's got these whips and they're all...semi-nude.

David:  Knockin' on 'im and it's like much worse...

Ian:    What's the point?

David:  Well the point is it's much worse than 'Smell the Glove'.

Ian:    Because he's the victim.  Their objections were that she was the victim.  You see?

Derek:  I see....

Nigel:  Oh...

David:  Ah....

Ian:    That's alright, if the singer's the victim, it's different. It's not sexist.

Nigel:  He did a twist on it.  A twist and it s-

Derek:  He did, he did.  He turned it around.

Ian:    We shoulda thought of that....

David:  We were so close....

Ian:    I mean if we had all you guys tied up, that probably woulda been fine.

All:    Ah....

Ian:    But it's...it's still a stupid cover.

David: It's such a fine line between stupid an'...

Derek:  ...and clever.

David:  Yeah, and clever."

And a finer line between 2 types of stupid.

I'd be interested in comments from those forum members who object to ANY censorship.

Are there actually any?

Even I, as someone on what some might describe as the "eccentric" wing of the  libertarian left, understands the need for both good manners and the "censorship" (I hate the word but can't think of a better one at the moment)  of content that either breaches the law, or is likely to lead to a breach of the law...

I think that these beheading videos come under this category. They exist to provoke fear and satisfy extreme prurience; they are usually stripped of context so for their posters to assert that they are seeking to condemn, rather than merely disseminate, the content of these videos strikes me as fatuous.

Facebook's response to the controversy is, if anything, even more fatuous. "Just as TV news programs often show upsetting images of atrocities, people can share upsetting videos on Facebook to raise awareness of actions or causes," Facebook said in a statement earlier this year. "While this [a film of a woman allegedly being decapitated by members of a Mexican drug cartel] video is shocking, our approach is designed to preserve people's rights to describe, depict and comment on the world in which we live."

Part of the problem is that 1) the internet is largely unregulated, and, as it is currently structured, largely ungovernable; and 2) the role of Facebook, Google, Twitter and the like has not yet been fully determined, not least by those companies themselves. They like to imagine themselves as dumb pipes, or facilitators, or distribution networks. I would argue that they are in fact publishers and/or broadcasters, and, as such, subject to the same constraints as, say, the BBC or The New York Times.

If, say, one were making a documentary about the brutality of the Mexican drug wars, there might - with the appropriate warnings beforehand - be an argument for using the beheading clip in question - but for any thoughtful editor, it would be a tough call to make. But just sticking them up on Facebook for people to gawp at isn't really on. There isn't even a "dislike" button on Facebook, FFS!

As a final point, one aspect of this story I do find rather objectionable is Cameron's intervention, which smacks to me of a combination of cynicism and moral panic. Typical, really.

Kevin - in fairness to Cameron (have I really just said that?), leading politicians are expected to have an opinion in real-time on almost any new and controversial topic these days and I suspect they are rather at the mercy of some special adviser/press officer who feeds them a hastily contrived line-to-take with the aim of enabling their master to look suitably informed.  Doesn't work too well sometimes and I think said politicians would often do better to simply reply saying they aren't currently sighted on the issue, which is likely true more often than not.

Was it Noel Coward who said something like '..better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt'?

MDS   

There is so much hypocrisy in this situation.

People in the UK/US have howled with protest at these films yet the former spends much time sucking up to nations that contiue to sanction state-murder (Saudi Arabia, China) and indeed the USA.

There is a degree of islamophobia going on here (shock). The USA states that continue to perform the most executions are of course the most generally right-wing christian of course.

Executions were also popular public entertainment not so many centuries ago. Vicarious pleasure from such acts is not as far from the surface is we sophisticated people might think.

The context of such a video is all. As stated if it were presented as part of a documentary with appropriate preamble and explanation I'd have no issue but with one other important caveat; the consent of the victim. I'd say the same about the executions performed in the USA. I personally see little difference in the level of barbarism. Complaining about the method by which the state kills people is rather missing the point.

What appears to have been presented has not been done to enhance debate but for sensationalism I think.

Bruce

Couldn't have put it better Bruce. Well observed and said.