In a time when people all over the world - not least in the Middle East - living in dictatorships, are trying to overthrow their leaders in favour of a democratic society, Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg (as the most well-known representative of FB) are heading the other way.
This might be due to the fact that Zuckerberg is not an intellectual himself, nor his collaborators and this leads them to perceive people using FB as an intellectual forum for interesting discussions as a threat to their existence and ideas.
I will give you one current example:
One of my friends on Facebook is Saad Hussni.
I joined his group as he initiated a page dedicated to film, directors, actors and other topics closely related to these subjects.
On this page he has displayed images and information, including film clips containing data and knowledge about 'Le Septième Art'.
This has lead to interesting discussions, complementary information added by others, intellectual discourses concerning films/movies, actors, directors and how to use the media in different ways etc.
Included in these discussions were also related topics as literature and influences from artists (and their paintings), musicians and so forth.
During the uprising in the Middle East and other countries Saad Hussni also published photos of the dictators now being opposed by the people in these countries, discussing their imminent(?) fall.
A couple of days ago his account was shut down and through other friends he has forwarded information where he explains that FB has decided to shut him down due to the fact that he has published material that infringes the publishing rules and -regulations controlling the content on FB!
What have we been able to see that might be seen as an 'abusive misuse of the FB-rules'?
Some photos have shown naked actors (Oh' My God!) and others the photos of dictators in different countries in the Middle East, as related above.
The photos of naked actors are by no means offensive, on the contrary they are very 'prim' if I may say so.
I here refer to photos publically available with the consent of the actors.
If this is to be regarded as 'abusive' I would urge those responsible for Facebook to take a more thorough look into the pages where people try to discuss serious matters but being 'abused' by spammers whose only goal is to degrade and humiliate the participants.
As one example I can mention a page where one discussed violence and rape against women and where a group of men 'participated' by using arguments like:
"In my country we use women as toilets"; "Women should be 'held hard' and 'trained', otherwise they don't learn to obey..." etc etc.
When I tried to initiate a serious discussion, they answered with anti-intellectual arguments, with the only goal to destroy the page. Sometimes they tried to 'defend' themselves by saying that this was their way of joking! The administrators closed the page down.
Facebook and Zuckerberg did not act against these men as far as I know.
Maybe he and his collaborators share their point of views?
Could the publication of photos of the dictators constitute the principal ground for FB:s action?
In that case it means that Zuckerberg and his 'friends'/collaborators, don't wish to upset alternatively share the same views as those very same dictators?!
If this is not the case one have to ask oneself if Facebook more and more is developing into a world of its own with censorship of ideas that might upset or create tensions between FB and different governments, organisations or institutions in the world.
On the one hand it's necessary with a certain control of the content being published on Facebook, on the other hand the freedom of opinion has to be respected, otherwise FB in a strange way diverge from the rest of the publishing world - except in the dictatorships - and in that case I think we all should reevaluate our participation in this giant social forum.
If FB has any other arguments for shutting down the account of Saad Hussni, it would be interesting to see them published, if possible.
In accordance with many FB-friends (Saad Hussni's 5000 'friends' on FB among others), I consider it totally unacceptable that Saad Hussni's account has been shut down and demand that it will be reopened.
So far no acceptable explanation has been given to the closing down of his account!
(Picture of FB-logo taken from: http://beachandbay.com.au/realestateblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/facebook-connecting-people.jpg)
(Photo Mark Zuckerberg taken from: http://www.linformaticien.com/Portals/0/2008/fevrier/mark%20zuckerberg.jpg)
I will give you one current example:
One of my friends on Facebook is Saad Hussni.
I joined his group as he initiated a page dedicated to film, directors, actors and other topics closely related to these subjects.
On this page he has displayed images and information, including film clips containing data and knowledge about 'Le Septième Art'.
This has lead to interesting discussions, complementary information added by others, intellectual discourses concerning films/movies, actors, directors and how to use the media in different ways etc.
Included in these discussions were also related topics as literature and influences from artists (and their paintings), musicians and so forth.
During the uprising in the Middle East and other countries Saad Hussni also published photos of the dictators now being opposed by the people in these countries, discussing their imminent(?) fall.
A couple of days ago his account was shut down and through other friends he has forwarded information where he explains that FB has decided to shut him down due to the fact that he has published material that infringes the publishing rules and -regulations controlling the content on FB!
What have we been able to see that might be seen as an 'abusive misuse of the FB-rules'?
Some photos have shown naked actors (Oh' My God!) and others the photos of dictators in different countries in the Middle East, as related above.
The photos of naked actors are by no means offensive, on the contrary they are very 'prim' if I may say so.
I here refer to photos publically available with the consent of the actors.
If this is to be regarded as 'abusive' I would urge those responsible for Facebook to take a more thorough look into the pages where people try to discuss serious matters but being 'abused' by spammers whose only goal is to degrade and humiliate the participants.
As one example I can mention a page where one discussed violence and rape against women and where a group of men 'participated' by using arguments like:
"In my country we use women as toilets"; "Women should be 'held hard' and 'trained', otherwise they don't learn to obey..." etc etc.
When I tried to initiate a serious discussion, they answered with anti-intellectual arguments, with the only goal to destroy the page. Sometimes they tried to 'defend' themselves by saying that this was their way of joking! The administrators closed the page down.
Facebook and Zuckerberg did not act against these men as far as I know.
Maybe he and his collaborators share their point of views?
Could the publication of photos of the dictators constitute the principal ground for FB:s action?
In that case it means that Zuckerberg and his 'friends'/collaborators, don't wish to upset alternatively share the same views as those very same dictators?!
If this is not the case one have to ask oneself if Facebook more and more is developing into a world of its own with censorship of ideas that might upset or create tensions between FB and different governments, organisations or institutions in the world.
On the one hand it's necessary with a certain control of the content being published on Facebook, on the other hand the freedom of opinion has to be respected, otherwise FB in a strange way diverge from the rest of the publishing world - except in the dictatorships - and in that case I think we all should reevaluate our participation in this giant social forum.
If FB has any other arguments for shutting down the account of Saad Hussni, it would be interesting to see them published, if possible.
In accordance with many FB-friends (Saad Hussni's 5000 'friends' on FB among others), I consider it totally unacceptable that Saad Hussni's account has been shut down and demand that it will be reopened.
So far no acceptable explanation has been given to the closing down of his account!
(Picture of FB-logo taken from: http://beachandbay.com.au/realestateblog/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/facebook-connecting-people.jpg)
(Photo Mark Zuckerberg taken from: http://www.linformaticien.com/Portals/0/2008/fevrier/mark%20zuckerberg.jpg)
5 commentaires:
Sadly, this doesn't surprise me.
Facebook is in the business of censoring art as well. Check out this article in the New York Times.
http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/02/18/art-school-runs-afoul-of-facebooks-nudity-police/
They threatened to close the account of an art school for posting classical drawings which happened to depict bare breasts.
Seriously, classical drawings.
I know personally of over 50 artists who's drawings and paintings were deleted, including my piece "What Remains", simply because it depicted a womans bare bottom. I've seen more graphic things in churches.
http://artbabel.blogspot.com/2011/01/sublime-or-shameless-facebook-censors.html
It's obvious that those running facebook have anti-intellectual sentiments. My question is why?
Richard T Scott: I've seen an exhibition with art made by Odd Nerdrum and I didn't find his art offensive. On the contrary I saw influences by many great predecessors and his art is very unique and personal. I like it very much!
24/2/11 12:27 AM
Yes, his work is incredible, and I can't understand why anyone would think it's offensive, unless you would say that Rembrandt is offensive, or Michelangelo's "David". Absolutely ridiculous!
Skicka en kommentar