Jump to content
IGNORED

FB bans mom for posting photos of son who lived 8 hours


gustava

Recommended Posts

That's just..........ew. Facebook needs to work on their priorities.

I read the comments following the article. I can't tell if this one is sarcasm or not, but it is irritating:

"Facebook is right. I always feel harassed and bullied by someone else's heartbreak. Being distracted from my own stuff by these pictures has all but destroyed me. Thank God the offending content is now gone. "

(sorry for not putting that in actual quote format, I'm still kind of new to this site and it takes me a while to figure things out)

I think it's sarcasm. I don't think anyone is really that selfish.

(If you are quoting someone's posts, just hit the quote button on the right side of the post. If you are just putting something like the above in quotes, highlight it and then click quote up in the message body options above.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 107
  • Created
  • Last Reply
I have a suspicion it was the woman's "friends" repeatedly reporting the photo(s) as offensive. I doubt Facebook hires photo trollers to find things to ban. It relies on community-generated reports.

I have a friend who works at Facebook, and all the employees have drunk the kool-aid and kiss Zuckerberg's ass. A picture from one of my albums was removed, and it was mild, and I couldn't figure out who among my friends would have reported it. I asked my friend, and he told me it's not always people on your friends list who reports is and that employees have access to everything and occasionally view photos looking for content that they feel is offensive.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Um, wow... That's a very stereotypical statement. Zuckerber's age and gender have nothing to do with what content other people report and facebook employees delete.

He's an immature little boy, and if he was fine with breastfeeding photos, then they wouldn't be banned. Even after the IPO, he still has the majority interest in the company, and what he says is what goes. He has the clout to change the rules and allow breastfeeding photos, but he hasn't, yet sexual photos are allowed. He's also compared himself to Steve Jobs as far as being an innovator goes, even though he and a friend were approached by Harvard to write a program that would enable Harvard's students to network. He and his friend started working on it, then Zuckerberg ran off with the idea, and claimed it as his own. (He was sues over this, and he lost.) He has personally innovated nothing. The idea wasn't even his. but he thinks of himself as a demigod. If he thinks boobs are for sexy times and he doesn't want them being seen used in their biological function, then all he has to do is say it's offensive, and that's it, banned. And this is what he's done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some of the photos of the child's Anencephaly are not for the faint of heart. On most of the dead baby pages children with this defect are artfully draped and posed, as in some of the shots the Walker family posted.

I don't have a problem with folks giving friends and family access to pictures of their child, regardless how graphic some are.

Buried in a news story I saw about it, they had more than just the sweet pictures than are on most articles. I screamed when I saw one. I know its their child, but if I had come across that on my twitter feed, I would have at the very least hid it. If they were just vague friends, I would have reported it. It was very very very graphic.

(Or, what she said, only with more screaming. :) )

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The family's story is incredibly moving. The pictures are beautiful.

Did you see the picture with the brain exposed and the child's eye looking to pop out?

Other that than one and a few others, yes, they are beautiful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you see the picture with the brain exposed and the child's eye looking to pop out?

Other that than one and a few others, yes, they are beautiful.

I have to admit that that one is going to haunt me for a while.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Buried in a news story I saw about it, they had more than just the sweet pictures than are on most articles. I screamed when I saw one. I know its their child, but if I had come across that on my twitter feed, I would have at the very least hid it. If they were just vague friends, I would have reported it. It was very very very graphic.

(Or, what she said, only with more screaming. :) )

Actually I didn't scream, nor did I have a negative reaction to the child's photos. There are a lot of beautiful yet heart breaking stories of parents who have shared this experience with these folks. I, like the child's mother, can only see a beautiful infant, who was and will be intensely loved by his family.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He's an immature little boy, and if he was fine with breastfeeding photos, then they wouldn't be banned. Even after the IPO, he still has the majority interest in the company, and what he says is what goes. He has the clout to change the rules and allow breastfeeding photos, but he hasn't, yet sexual photos are allowed. He's also compared himself to Steve Jobs as far as being an innovator goes, even though he and a friend were approached by Harvard to write a program that would enable Harvard's students to network. He and his friend started working on it, then Zuckerberg ran off with the idea, and claimed it as his own. (He was sues over this, and he lost.) He has personally innovated nothing. The idea wasn't even his. but he thinks of himself as a demigod. If he thinks boobs are for sexy times and he doesn't want them being seen used in their biological function, then all he has to do is say it's offensive, and that's it, banned. And this is what he's done.

I take it you know him personally then? Hung out with him? Had a chance to discuss these matter with him? Or are you assuming he is an "immature little boy" because he and/or his company don't follow your beliefs to the letter?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, one pic was a bit graphic. But, this is a love story. A baby that was loved and cherished. They had to take as many pictures as possible during the short amount of time they had with him. Those are their only memories.

I can say I remember when my DD or DS took their first steps, first day of school, etc. They had 8 hours to create memories.

Plus, didn't you know going in that one or two pics may have been graphic? Really. This was a baby with a major birth defect. If you didn't want to see them, why click?

ETA: I had rather see these pictures than the bathroom boobie shots that are so popular.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I find this interesting because I have a FB friend who delivered at week 26-ish (don't remember exactly) because the baby stopped growing. He was dead when he was delivered.

Well, the family took a ton of pictures, including professional ones in the hospital. And then burial pictures and last minute dead baby pictures before the burial. Dead baby pictures were popping up on my feed everyday for nearly a month!

I know I had the option to hide her, so I didn't report her. But as a mom they were hard to see because the baby was malformed and obviously dead. I regret clicking on that blog because the pictures were honestly horrifying!

I'm not a fan of dead baby pictures on Facebook. I know they can help some parents grieve but it's not something people want to see pop up on their FB feed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take it you know him personally then? Hung out with him? Had a chance to discuss these matter with him? Or are you assuming he is an "immature little boy" because he and/or his company don't follow your beliefs to the letter?

I hate to agree with Elle, but he really is an immature little brat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I take it you know him personally then? Hung out with him? Had a chance to discuss these matter with him? Or are you assuming he is an "immature little boy" because he and/or his company don't follow your beliefs to the letter?

Aside from personally knowing someone who works directly with him who has nothing favorable to say about him, have you ever actually watched his interviews? The Charlie Rose interview clearly showed how highly he thinks of himself.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

According to a post on her blog today (oursweetboygraysonjames.blogspot.com - do not go if you do not want to see pictures that are sad), they have received an apology from Facebook via email.

The mom's words on why she posted the picture:

Here is my answer: I was tired of trying to hide my son, the way he was, just to make others feel comfortable. I felt like people would be scared or offended because his head didn't look like other babies. A sudden impulse, in my grieving process, told me to be proud and not worried about the thoughts of others

I haven't seen the picture in question (and I don't want to - I'm a mother, I can only imagine her grief, and the pictures on the blog make my heart hurt enough) but I can understand why she would post the picture and why others would be uncomfortable.

Then she kind of gets off on a tangent and comes back to her opening - she is a mother, and this was her child.

What satan meant for evil, God meant for so much good. A baby boy, imperfect in the world's eyes, touched the lives of people all over the globe. For this mistake on facebook's behalf, I've been able to share what God had intended in the first place. This avenue, through media and such has raised awareness to anencephaly and quite simply the importance of choosing life. For life is precious, and God's most precious gift.

After being interviewed by local news and our story and frustration being shared across the globe, I wondered if facebook would apologize. That's all I wanted, an apology. I didn't want to sue them, I just wanted them to allow me to do what I feel my right is...to share my baby boy with everyone else.

I can't imagine being in her shoes, so I won't judge her. If I found out during my pregnancy that the baby had anencephaly, I think I'd want to have an abortion, because I can't imagine going through an entire pregnancy that I knew would have only sorrow and bittersweet at the end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aside from personally knowing someone who works directly with him who has nothing favorable to say about him, have you ever actually watched his interviews? The Charlie Rose interview clearly showed how highly he thinks of himself.

No I've never watched the interviews. I don't pretend to know what kind of person someone is when I've never met them personally either. You want to believe he's a jerk because your friend thinks so, that's your prerogative, but claiming your views as fact when you have nothing more than second hand experience doesn't make it true either.

As for the original comment I responded too, the only evidence that SealFan1963 gave was that he was a 28 year old male. That is just an agist, sexist assumption on SealFan's part.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have no problem with the pictures existing, or even existing on certain sites on the internet. I'm sure they are precious to the parents and perhaps to some friends and family. My problem is that posting the particularly graphic photos on facebook, even friends only, is pretty much like posting them on a cork board that all your friends will walk by at some point. When people post pictures, they just show up in your stream. You can't warn of content. You can't prepare yourself.

Now, if the mother's facebook friends' composition is like most folks, it means that everyone from her old high school buddies to former coworkers possibly saw very graphic photos that they had no reason to expect they'd see over their morning coffee, no matter how much they cared for what the mother was going through. If she wanted to "not hide", she could have posted a link to her blog with a suitable warning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My problem is that posting the particularly graphic photos on facebook, even friends only, is pretty much like posting them on a cork board that all your friends will walk by at some point. When people post pictures, they just show up in your stream. You can't warn of content. You can't prepare yourself.

I agree that putting them in an album would have been easier on the f-list. I'm glad they got the apology though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No I've never watched the interviews. I don't pretend to know what kind of person someone is when I've never met them personally either. You want to believe he's a jerk because your friend thinks so, that's your prerogative, but claiming your views as fact when you have nothing more than second hand experience doesn't make it true either.

As for the original comment I responded too, the only evidence that SealFan1963 gave was that he was a 28 year old male. That is just an agist, sexist assumption on SealFan's part.

CanadianHippe - Yep, I'm willing to admit it was an ageist and sexist remark based on a few things that I know about Zuckerberg and a lot of things I know about young men in their 20s. Especially as a parent of one. I also think Tom Cruise is bat shit crazy and I don't know him either.

What I don't understand is why you have such a need to defend Zuckerberg, do you know him personally?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple years ago, my friend's cousin gave birth prematurely and the baby died several hours later. She had pictures taken of her holding the baby in the hospital. The pictures ended up appearing in my newsfeed, even though I was not FB friends with her. I was able to see them because my friend had commented on the pictures. The pictures themselves disturbed me (I'm glad that picture services exist for grieving parents, but I can't handle pictures of death), but what made me feel really awful was the idea that I was seeing pictures that she never intended for me (or anybody else she wasn't FB friends with) to see because of a loophole in Facebook's constantly changing privacy settings. If FB just made privacy settings consistent and easier to figure out, it would save everybody a lot of headaches.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad FB apologized as I can't see the pictures being against their terms of service. I know parents approach grieving differently, but if those pictures had appeared in my newsfeed, I would have been distressed. I wouldn't have reported her but I'd have been either removing her as a friend or hiding her for fear more would show up. I know I'm tenderhearted about seeing things like that so I'm not going near her blog or the news stories. I think a link to the blog might have been more appropriate in consideration for others but then I'm also not going to hold someone who just carried and gave birth to a stillborn with such severe issues to a high standard of considering other peoples' feelings either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CanadianHippe - Yep, I'm willing to admit it was an ageist and sexist remark based on a few things that I know about Zuckerberg and a lot of things I know about young men in their 20s. Especially as a parent of one. I also think Tom Cruise is bat shit crazy and I don't know him either.

What I don't understand is why you have such a need to defend Zuckerberg, do you know him personally?

I don't feel the need to defend Zuckerberg specifically. I feel the need to speak out against gross generalizations, stereotyping, and feeble assumptions.

I know plently about men in the 20's, seeing as I too am 28 and know a number of men in their 20's. Most are not more obsessed with fake breasts than real babies. Most don't even like fake breasts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yous all know I like my riot porn. I had a FB avatar of a Molotov in the air (Greece) and before that a police car on fire (Germany). Those were OK but not a hrieving mum with her wean?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yous all know I like my riot porn. I had a FB avatar of a Molotov in the air (Greece) and before that a police car on fire (Germany). Those were OK but not a hrieving mum with her wean?

Please friend me. Please? This is exactly what I need in my life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't feel the need to defend Zuckerberg specifically. I feel the need to speak out against gross generalizations, stereotyping, and feeble assumptions.

I know plently about men in the 20's, seeing as I too am 28 and know a number of men in their 20's. Most are not more obsessed with fake breasts than real babies. Most don't even like fake breasts.

He just married a woman who just graduated from medical school.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.