Facebook Bans Breastfeeding Pictures
So here’s where policies and procedures can effect your branding. Facebook is banning breastfeeding pictures because it deems them in bad taste and not in line with their policies.
First and foremost Facebook can do whatever it wants with it’s website. If you don’t like their policies then head over to Myspace or some other social site. Period. They have rules and their sticking to them and I actually applaud them for it.
It’s not a matter of whether or not it’s natural to breastfeed. Facebook doesn’t want 14 year olds downloading pictures they deem inappropriate to them. Here’s what they had to say:
Facebook spokeswoman Meredith Chin said Facebook – which has more than 200,000 Australian members and 31 million users worldwide – did not prevent mothers from uploading photos of themselves breastfeeding their babies, but it did remove content that was reported as violating Facebook’s terms of use.
“Photos containing an exposed breast do violate our Terms and are removed,” she said.
Here’s what I find interesting. Mothers aren’t boycotting Facebook but instead have started new groups to voice their concern. Why not just quit Facebook? If you go out to a pizza place and the pizza is not good you don’t go back do you? This is an interesting branding problem don’t you think?
What do you think of the Facebook breastfeeding controversy?
![[del.icio.us]](http://images.del.icio.us/static/img/delicious.small.gif){kind=small}
December 31st, 2008 at 11:45 am
So glad you asked….I answered all of your questions here:
http://phdinparenting.com/2008/12/30/breaking-it-down-for-facebook/
December 31st, 2008 at 11:55 am
Personally, I think it’s funny that Facebook will ban breastfeeding photos (no problem with them doing that, btw), and yet run sexy ads on the sidebars.
December 31st, 2008 at 1:25 pm
The moms can’t leave Facebook. They are addicted to it. They’ll complain but the truth is they won’t leave.
January 1st, 2009 at 1:18 am
I think it’s a shame that Facebook is banning pictures of breastfeeding moms. Why should a person who is enjoying the service that Facebook is offering have to leave because they have discriminating policies? I’ve looked at some of the pictures that were banned and they are sweet pictures of moms bonding with their babies. Just because they have a nipple in them, they are deemed obscene. I don’t think this is right when the company allows extremely provocative pictures of thong-clad bottoms.
January 1st, 2009 at 6:15 am
On one hand I agree that Facebook has the right to ban these photos. On the other hand, they are so big now that I think it would be wrong to some degree to censor their users according to their standards. Many people have no choice but to use Facebook if all their friends are on it.
January 1st, 2009 at 6:52 am
@Charles Sipe: “Many people have no choice but to use Facebook if all their friends are on it.” That’s an interesting take and a pretty powerful position Facebook is in. Which is why all these complaining people haven’t left. But the service is free and that’s their rules. They can hop over to Myspace anytime.
January 1st, 2009 at 6:56 am
@Wendy Maynard: Having a policy pertaining to nudity is hardly discriminating (whether it’s natural or not). And Facebook is ALLOWING people to use their service for FREE. If you don’t like their rules go somewhere else. If they wanted they could ban photos of people in bathing suits or smoking cigs. They can make any policy they darn please. Add to it that everyone that signs up agrees to their policies before you can set up an account…
February 18th, 2009 at 12:37 pm
“Add to it that everyone that signs up agrees to their policies before you can set up an account?”
Very true people never read the TOU agreement. Most people don’t realize Facebook owns rights to everything you post in your account. Any content you post in Facebook, they own full rights to distribute, reproduce, sell, etc. So that photo you took or marketing idea they now have rights to use as they wish. This is actually fairly common terms of use in the internets, which very few people realize. Probably because no one reads the TOU.
http://www.facebook.com/terms.php?ref=pf
January 3rd, 2011 at 7:55 pm
“Why not just quit Facebook? If you go out to a pizza place and the pizza is not good you don’t go back do you? This is an interesting branding problem don’t you think?”
I think the pizza place analogy is a very poor example of what mothers are experiencing. If I don’t like a pizza place there’s at least 5 more in my neighborhood to go to. Facebook is the only place to share a large amount of information with my friends and family in a quick fashion. If I didn’t care for the pizza, I would be making the choice to leave. If the pizza place told me I couldn’t eat there because I was nursing in public or they didn’t like the color of my hair or any other arbitrary reason, that would be discrimination and against the law. Facebook may be a private company, but as you pointed out in your blog they have over 31 million people joined worldwide. I would consider that a very public venue. And if the right to breastfeed in public is guaranteed in most places worldwide, why should we not protest facebook discriminating against us.
January 3rd, 2011 at 8:46 pm
Here is my issue with it all. In almost every state, in the U.S. breastfeeding is protected, by law, stating that it is NOT deemed obscene. It is exempt from public nudity laws. It is deemed NOT a lewd or lascivious act. In many states it is actually a violation of the mother and the child’s civil rights to ask them to leave, cover up or nurse in a different area. My question is, how is Facebook above this law?
Facebook’s headquarters are in California, so shouldn’t the business be required to adhere to the same laws as any other business in California? If so:
Right to Breastfeed in Public (1997)
Section 43.3 of the Civil Code
“Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a mother may breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, except the private home or residence of another, where the mother and the child are otherwise authorized to be present.”