FACEBOOK BANS BEFORE AND AFTERS

srogers89

Hi guys,

I just wanted everyone's thoughts on the below article (have copied and pasted link). The basic gist is a woman's ad was taken down as it was violating Facebooks policy, an excerpt from the article;

"The image used here is of a woman standing in a large pair of pants holding the waist band out to show weight loss. The images are considered to be promoting idealised physical appearances and are policy violating," the spokeswoman wrote.

"It is also worth noting that things like before and after photos, images with scales, tape measures, zoomed in body parts are also considered to be promoting idealised physical images and are not allowed."

She was then told that she was promoting "adult content".

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/health/marilyn-mckennas-weight-loss-picture-violates-facebooks-terms/story-fneuzkvr-1226800419086

Has Facebook gone too far? Or is this designed to help promote a healthy body image and for the greater good?

uconnwinsnc

Facebook is a business. Unfortunately, the moment you sign up, your image and everything you put on there is owned by them. As much as I hate it, they can delete what they want from their site.

tiptoethruthetulips

I saw that, incredible, someone must have reported it.

I can't believe it was categorised as being adult content, when they allow all those pages with women more than half naked posing in suggestive ways.

If they don't allow that, that's a lot of motivational pages that will have to be tackled next.

srogers89

I saw that, incredible, someone must have reported it.

I can't believe it was categorised as being adult content, when they allow all those pages with women more than half naked posing in suggestive ways.

If they don't allow that, that's a lot of motivational pages that will have to be tackled next.

I know! This is what I am concerned about. I am all for promoting healthy over an idealised body image but where does censorship stop?

FlaxMilk

I'm honestly trying to figure out if this is a hoax.

They are a private site, so not worried about censorship, but it seems so silly.

journey_man

Facebook is a business. Unfortunately, the moment you sign up, your image and everything you put on there is owned by them. As much as I hate it, they can delete what they want from their site.

No one is question FB's right to do anything. Of course they can delete whatever they want. That's not the point.

srogers89

Apparantly not a hoax.......I thought that for a second too but April Fools isn't for another 3 1/2 months! Just absurdity all round.

What is worse is that someone has reported it, someone thinks that this is worth reporting? Of all the things on Facebook to report, this si what they chose! A woman turns her life around but apparantly she is shaming the wider community...I don't get it.

_Zardoz_

A representative from Facebook told KOMO News the post was considered an ad because Ms McKenna was attempting to "boost" the post. Facebook considers boosted posts, which are paid for, to be ads

This is the interesting bit. It makes me think she's only telling half the story.

mungowungo

I thought the final paragraph rather telling - that they considered it to be an ad as she was boosting her post. I bet they wouldn't have had a problem if it was an ad and she had paid for the webspace.

PinkNinjaLaura

You pay to boost posts, and yes they do monitor images even on landing pages for ads that run.

frankhenderson

I posted one on there a couple years ago and it's still there to this day! So I would question the situation.

srogers89

I don't think anyone doubts they monitor them, but it is a little absurd that this content was considered adult/offensive by Facebook.

knittinlady

I regularly post progress pics on my Facebook page. I've never had any issues.

indignantgnome

You probably should understand ALL the facts before making claims like that.

Her picture was fine - as her profile picture, posted on her own wall, whatever. The problem arises when she tries to "promote" the image, which effectively makes it an ad in that it's a paid for post guaranteed to show up on more walls than Facebook's current algorithm would otherwise allow for.

Facebook doesn't ban before and afters. Facebook couldn't care less if you want to show off your new body you worked so hard for, assuming you're doing it in a decent manner. Facebook DOES reject (not ban, but REJECT) images for promotion, or for ads, based on content, and in this case it's to protect it's users from get-skinny-quick scams.

indignantgnome

I thought the final paragraph rather telling - that they considered it to be an ad as she was boosting her post. I bet they wouldn't have had a problem if it was an ad and she had paid for the webspace.

Actually, they do have an issue with pictures like that in an ad, even if you pay for webspace.

3dogsrunning

The headline is misleading. They are not banning all before and afters.

UPDATE: According to a representative from Facebook, the photo was rejected because McKenna was attempting to "boost" the post, which is a paid service offered by Facebook to bring the post to a larger audience. Because it's a paid service, Facebook considers boosted posts to be advertisements.

.

FlaxMilk

Facebook DOES reject (not ban, but REJECT) images for promotion, or for ads, based on content, and in this case it's to protect it's users from get-skinny-quick scams.

This makes sense.

srogers89

Correct, they are not banning before an afters on profile pages (I should have made that clear - it won't let me edit the title though) but the fact they are doing it on sponsored posts/ads is crazy.

Especially with all the fistpo/motivational pages around, I regularly see sponsored posts for fitness groups, dieting pages etc.. all using the images they mention are banned (scales, before/after, zoom ins on select body parts). I am more concerned about where this will lead in the future and peoples opinions on whether this is deemed too far (even for ads).

FlaxMilk

Someone tell her to just write "What's your excuse?" on it and she won't have to pay to boost.