Can what you say online have real world consequences?

[soccerdad72]

adding my own opinion was unnecessary.

That's never stopped anyone on the DIS before.

 

[OhMari]

Thank you. I can respect that opinion even if I don't agree with it. I'm not on FB so I don't know... when you report the pictures, do you have to say what rule you feel they're violating? If so, what do you say? I would hope "I don't want pedophiles to see it" isn't a good enough reason to have a picture taken down.

Yes, you can tell them what you think of the photo. They do a review and most times the pictures are left alone-Facebook does not have a problem with it. If they do, they message you either way.

 

[Mackenzie Click-Mickelson]

Ok so this seems very relevant to the discussion.

I am in the midst of watching the DIS Unplugged WDW edition vlog that was posted yesterday. In the episode Teresa apologizes for a comment she made last week on the episode.

I'm fairly certain the comment she was referring to was related to a discussion on discounts and whatnot in regards to what is going on with WDW and attendance, etc and she had said in an offhand way about the Value resorts (and I want to say she more was referring to the All-Stars) "those people don't have money..they're saving their money for something else"..I'm not positive, even after rewatching that part of last week's episode, but it sounded like she was comparing to the Bay Lake Tower.

When I was watching that last week and heard that that she said that I myself was like "wait...did she just say that". I don't think she intended that comment to be taken the way it was but nonetheless she said it and it was a poor judgement call to have said that to begin with IMO, as much as I like her, given that she is a representative of not only the Dreams Unlimited travel agents but as a representative of the DIS. The reason she is apologizing for her comment is people took notice of it and responded as such.

It is however clear that in this week's episode that she does still believe that people who stay at the Values can't afford X. She even said "I rewatched last's week's episode and the only people who could have been offended are those who can't afford what we were talking about". *honestly I feel the shovels are getting more work as she's digging herself more into a hole instead of out it*

It's one thing for people on the Boards to share that thoughtprocess (I've seen it enough that there are people who put the resort categories into a caste, haves and haves not category) it's another thing for a person who represents the company and who is part of the travel agency that may be booking you to openly have that comment. What's more to my viewpoint is using the word "can't".

 

[sam_gordon]

Yes, you can tell them what you think of the photo. They do a review and most times the pictures are left alone-Facebook does not have a problem with it. If they do, they message you either way.

OK, so what do you say? That it shouldn't be posted, or that it breaks some guideline/rule?

 

[MamaBelle4]

There are 2 people in my community that have gone to jail for child enticement, child pornography, sex with a minor. Both are back in our community now with restrictions. I know this is just my feelings, but if that baby was my grandson or granddaughter and I knew this person was looking at my child in this way, I would be so disheartened. It is a sad feeling for me, that the innocence of a small baby's picture could be used in this way. This is why I feel it should not be shared on social media. Keep the pictures private.

I've not said anything here, really, on this because I can understand your position.

But here, you are empowering the predator. You are censoring yourself and changing your behavior because you FEAR what that predator might do. That is giving them far more power than they already have. It REALLY is the same as when a person asks a woman who was raped, "Well, what were you wearing?" as if she had control over his behavior and could have prevented it had she dressed more modestly.

A child predator is the same. If a parent finds out photos of her child were distorted or used for ill will by a pedophile, the first question shouldn't be, "Well, did you post pictures of your kids on Facebook?" It implies it is the victim's fault some monster preyed on their child's innocence.

 

[OhMari]

OK, so what do you say? That it shouldn't be posted, or that it breaks some guideline/rule?

No, again my prospective. They only determine if it crosses the line to pornography.

 

[sam_gordon]

No, again my prospective. They only determine if it crosses the line to pornography.

I don't mean to beat a dead horse, but do you say "this might be pornography"?

 

[wenrob]

As I mentioned, I'm not a FB... but what happens when a picture is reported? Is the picture immediately taken down and then it's investigated? I'm not sure that would hurt a business (even a photography studio).

I've known more than a few photographers who've had their accounts locked up while being reviewed.

 

[okeydokey]

It is just not the chest, the whole baby is naked. Sorry, I feel it is wrong. I saw an interview once with Brooke Shields and her mom had her in a commercial when she was a baby naked and she said it was wrong.

I wish you wouldn't sexualize baby pictures that way. It is wrong.

Your poor friends, do they know you are sabotaging their business?

 

[sam_gordon]

I've known more than a few photographers who've had their accounts locked up while being reviewed.

When the account is locked, what does that mean? Can a visitor still see the page but the owner can't make changes? No one can get to the page? How long does the lock last?

 

[wilkeliza]

When the account is locked, what does that mean? Can a visitor still see the page but the owner can't make changes? No one can get to the page? How long does the lock last?

The page is not visible and no one can make changes or see it. It can stay locked for a day to months. I had a friends personal page get blocked for 2 months because he said something someone else didn't like and someone reported him. It took facebook a while to get to his review because it wasn't a top priority issue.

 

[mmouse37]

I think there are levels. A newborn photoshoot without their chest covered, fine. But when the child is older there are parents that think it's cute to post naked pictures, sometimes of kids doing poses that would be sexualized if they were in a slightly different context. They may not intend for their child to be viewing in a sexual way, but they did unintentionally invite it. Even if you think you know everyone who has access to your social media well enough to know they're "ok" with it (and no one really knows others that well), you can't control who it gets shared with or where the images end up from there. There are no hard lines, like when they turn x months or years old you can't show those anymore. I think that parents should get a certain level of choice on when to stop, but at the same time, if you're the site hosting those images, and you want to impose a hard rule because you're assuming liability there, I'm ok with that too.

On this note, I just finished a book called Best Intentions by Joseph Klempner which deals with a somewhat related issue. A man innocently took of photo of his own child in the bath and it turned into a nightmare for him and his daughter.

https://www.amazon.com/s/ref=nb_sb_noss?url=search-alias=digital-text&field-keywords=best+intentions,+klempner&rh=n:133140011,k:best+intentions\c+klempner

MJ

 

[CarolAnn856]

No, again my prospective. They only determine if it crosses the line to pornography.

So, after reading this thread and seeing that the kinds of photos you are reporting is not considered to be pornography, and after learning that you are very likely harming the photographers' business due to your personal opinion and not any kind of fact, will you continue harming local businesses by continuing to report their photos?

 

[sunshinehighway]

As I mentioned, I'm not a FB... but what happens when a picture is reported? Is the picture immediately taken down and then it's investigated? I'm not sure that would hurt a business (even a photography studio).

Obviously it must vary but the account can be locked until the complaint has been reviewed. The thing with small businesses or new businesses is a small thing can really cause problems. If you have someone repeatedly reporting you for pornography or repeatedly accusing you of deal in pornography, especially involving a baby, then it can really hurt your business.
I guess it doesn't make sense to me. I certainly wouldn't continue to be fb friends with people I had to repeatedly report because I felt they are posting inappropriate pictures of children. It really sounds more like a case of someone not looking and reporting it than actually believing it's pornography

 

[here757]

That is a little extreme to tell kids that even if they don't open something with a nude photo in it they can be persecuted. I don't think that is legal at all. As a lady online I get more d picks than I ever care for especially being engaged but I'm not the one breaking the law if all I do is delete it with out sending it to someone else or saving it.

I think she was referring to if you get an email with the pix. Don't open it and forward it to others..

 

[wilkeliza]

I think she was referring to if you get an email with the pix. Don't open it and forward it to others..

That' snot what it says though. It said even if they don't open it that simply having it on your phone could be grounds for prosecution of possession.

 

[here757]

That' snot what it says though. It said even if they don't open it that simply having it on your phone could be grounds for prosecution of possession.

Possession of child porn?
Oh yea it's a charge.
But I think if the person can prove they had no knowledge then the charges wouldn't stick..
Hate to say it but I live in a very large military area.. young service members are always getting the charge.
But the thing is.. once the arrest is made. Reguardless of outcome that person is always known as that guy..
The news never follows up on the story.
I think the op was giving a stern warning to her children.

 

[teller80]

A different example, with my current employer, a person on a different shift was bruised up from the work we do. They posted about it all over FB, but didn't report the "injury" (it's not really injuries, just bumps and bruises you get from doing the work). Well, management caught wind of it and that person got an extra day off via suspension.

I'm not really understanding why your coworker would be suspended for posting her bruises on FB?

 

[mousehockey37]

I'm not really understanding why your coworker would be suspended for posting her bruises on FB?

Any injuries MUST be reported, no matter how minor. When she posted on FB about it, she used the company name and such. They looked back through the reports and saw nothing. So her failing to report an injury got her suspended.

 

[here757]

Any injuries MUST be reported, no matter how minor. When she posted on FB about it, she used the company name and such. They looked back through the reports and saw nothing. So her failing to report an injury got her suspended.

Like for insurance purposes?
I could see that