A leaked document that details a set of guidelines on which type of images are allowed to be published on Facebook has left users amused and perplexed at the same time. The manual appears to take a more liberal approach to blood, while nudity is a big no-no.
The hit-list included images of breastfeeding if nipples are exposed, drunk or unconscious people, people using the bathroom, anyone who shows approval, delight, involvement in animal or human torture, and sexual fetishes in any form, even if naked parts are hidden. However, images of bodily fluids except semen, flesh wounds and crushed heads, limbs (as long as no insides are showing), people using marijuana are acceptable.
“The ‘rules’ are indeed funny. Someone smiling in a picture might be drunk. So I really want to know what constitutes as looking drunk enough for the picture to be banned? Having said that, I agree that censorship is required to maintain decorum on a networking platform. Even though the guidelines are somewhat absurd, one can’t be allowed to post objectionable stuff,” avers Meenakshi Tewari, a content developer.
It’s better to keep private things private instead of exhibiting them on Facebook, suggests art student Parivartan Naik.
Garima Sharma, a student counsellor, agrees with Naik but adds, “Policing is needed to keep a check on mischief-mongers, but it shouldn’t be skewed. If nudity is bothersome, why is gore allowed?”
Soft-skills trainer and mediaman Nilanjan Ghosh shares an incident when a friend directed him to a woman’s Facebook profile where blasphemous comments were being made about a religion. “I reported the post to Facebook and messaged the woman requesting her to remove the post. If more people would have reported the post, I’m sure it would have been removed and the user banned from using the site. You can only request people to avoid posting objectionable content, but you can’t take away the freedom to express,” says Ghosh.