The content Facebook takes down with alacrity!
While the social networking site was unable to do anything to control rumour mongering and doctoring of photos on its pages, why is it so eager to censor art,
asks SHOBHA S V
Kolkata-based visual communications professional,Avi Das, was flummoxed when, last week, he found that some works of artists Salvador Dali and PhillipeHalsman that he had uploaded on his account was taken down by Facebook.
He received the following communication from them: “Facebook has a strict policy against the sharing of pornographic content and imposes limitations on the display of nudity. At the same time, we aspire to respect people’s right to share content of personal importance, whether those are photos of a sculpture like Michelangelo's David or family photos of a child breastfeeding."
In a similar case, a few months ago, NiteshMohanty, a graphic artist from Mumbai, found that a photo he had uploaded on his Facebook timeline disappeared. Just like that! He soon received a message from Facebook stating that the photograph he’d uploaded violated its terms and conditions. The picture that Mohanty had shared on his wall was a sensuous art-work (with elements of nudity) by Roy Nachum, an Israeli artist.
Incidentally, both the photos that were taken down by Facebook belonged to reputed artists. Ironically, the censorship of artwork happened even as rumour-mongering and morphed photos of violence between Bodos and Muslims in Kokrajhar in Assam were on social networking sites, including Facebook. They were removed only after violence broke out in Mumbai and after the exodus of members of the North-East from Delhi, Pune and Bangalore.
The Indian Government has demanded that social networking companies monitor content. While Facebook was unable to do anything in controlling the rumour mongering and doctoring of photos on its pages, the on-going censorship of artwork demonstrates that some content is being actively monitored by Facebook and taken down.
This is not the first time that the art world finds itself on the receiving end of Facebook’s stance on nudity. Last year, the New York Academy of Art lashed out against Facebook’s policy of trying to curb artistic freedom on their blog. The academy had uploaded a drawing (a nude sketch) by Steven Assael that was a part of an exhibition curated by them. Facebook removed the picture and the academy was served this notice.
Outraged by Facebook’s policy of controlling art, the academy representatives posted on their blog: “We, the Graduate School of Figurative Art, find it difficult to allow facebook to be the final arbiter – and online curator – of the artwork we share with the world.”
Facebook's terms and conditions
For Facebook, all this is par for the course. Its guidelines are clear. Facebook claims to take down photographs that violate their community standards. Photos and videos containing nudity, drug use, or other graphic content are not allowed on Facebook.
Facebook also encourages people to report if they see anything that ‘violates’ Facebook’s terms and conditions. However, according to Facebook, not all content that gets reported gets taken down.
Facebook has had a strict policy on sharing of pornographic content and display of nudity. The mention of pornography and nudity in artistic work in the same vein has been a bone of contention, especially with the art world. However, Facebook claims that it is not against art and that while nude photographs are not allowed, it encourages nude paintings by artists.
This then brings into focus, what is ‘art’ as defined by Facebook?
Controversy over breastfeeding pictures
The photo that Das had uploaded also had element of nudity in it. He joked on his wall, “I also wonder why Salvador Dali didn't resort to breast feeding so that his work could be shared?” According to the Facebook policy, photos of women nursing their babies is allowed on Facebook. However, there is a catch as Facebook mentions that photos with an exposed breast in cases where the child is not actively engaged in nursing violate Facebook's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities. In the past, Facebook has been subjected to much anger after its representatives took down pictures of women nursing their babies.
How does FB censorship work?
On the last count, Facebook has about 800 million users as subscribers. So how does it manage to police posts of such a large mass of users? Simple. Make all of them potential censors.
Facebook relies on its user community to alert its representatives if a violation has taken place. Facebook claims that the photos it acts upon are almost exclusively brought to its attention by other userswho report it. Every photo comes with a ‘Report this photo’ button thata user can click on if one has a problem with the pictures.
However, Facebook doesn’t rely solely on its user community for surveillance. Early this year, Gawker, a popular media blog in US, broke a story in February 2012 about Facebook outsourcing its content monitoring work to a company having offices in Mexico, India, Philippines and Turkey. The employees of the firm have been given clear guidelines on the content that needs to be taken down on Facebook.
Thus, the job of the employees is to keep trolling throughout Facebook in search of pictures that violate Facebook’s long list of terms and conditions. Some of the bizarre things that merit take down of pictures according to Facebook include all photoshopped images of people, images of urine, faeces, vomit, pus and ear wax, depiction of camel toes among many others. Unlike Twitter, which records its details of censorship with Chilling Effects blog, Facebook does not keep any record of its censorship.
What does the law say?
Despite Facebook having taken down their photographs, both Das and Mohanty have gone ahead and shared links on their walls containing the very pictures that got taken down. Anja Kovacs, a researcher on the issues of freedom of expression on the Internet says, “Facebook is part of the larger network. They can take down content from their website but they cannot ensure take down of content from the Internet. This shows the inherent limitation of censorship in dealing with complex issues like this. People are always going to find out alternate ways.”
Facebook’s policies are in line with what is expected of them from the Indian law. According to the amended Information Technology Act, 2008, it is imperative on the part of an intermediary—in this case Facebook— to lay down terms and conditions governing the use of their site. Also, according to the rules, anyone can complain against any content uploaded on the site if they are offended by it. In case of an official complaint under the Act, the intermediary has to take down the content within 36 hours. The user can go to the courts and appeal under the law against the take down. There is no immediate appeals process.
What can you do?
What can you do if you think your photograph has been unfairly taken down by Facebook? Unfortunately, a user cannot do anything if Facebook takes down their picture. There is no appeals process. Some artists have also had their accounts blocked because of posting ‘nude’ pictures. Facebook has laid down an appeal process here. However, there is no appeal process for someone who has had their individual pictures removed. Also, in Das and Mohanty’s case, both do not know if anyone personally complained against them.
Both Das and Mohanty insist that there was a vibrant discussion around the photographs that they had uploaded. Das says, “It boggles my mind that people who scour the site on behalf of FB, actually found a Dali picture to violate terms and conditions and also found it pornographic! It amazes me that they glossed over the description of the image, the number of shares and the discussion which took place and still went ahead and took down the picture!”
The question that needs to be asked is do such mechanisms work in social media? There has to be greater transparency in the censorship process and users must be given the chance to explain and appeal against the take down of content. And above all, encouraging a climate of debate and discussion that is so essential for creative self-expression.