The social media network has clarified language and added examples in its community standards.
Facebook is getting more explicit.
The social media network has updated its community standards by clarifying language and adding examples.
The goal is to provide more detail and clarity on what is and is not allowed, reads a blog post written by Monika Bickert, Facebook head of global policy management, and Chris Sonderby, deputy general counsel:
“For example, what exactly do we mean by nudity, or what do we mean by hate speech? While our policies and standards themselves are not changing, we have heard from people that it would be helpful to provide more clarity and examples.”
According to the revised standards, examples of nudity that Facebook will remove now include:
- “Photographs of people displaying genitals or focusing in on fully exposed buttocks”
- “Some images of female breasts if they include the nipple”
- “Explicit images of sexual intercourse”
Facebook allows photos of:
- “Women actively engaged in breastfeeding”
- “Women … showing breasts with post-mastectomy scarring”
- “Paintings, sculptures, and other art that depicts nude figures”
In addition to nudity, Facebook has updated its standards on self-injury, dangerous organizations, bullying and harassment, criminal activity, sexual violence and exploitation, hate speech, and violence and graphic content.
Hate speech is among the “particularly challenging” issues for Facebook, according to the blog post.
The community standards section on hate speech has been expanded from two sentences to more than a dozen sentences.
The definition of hate speech still includes attacks on other people based on their race, ethnicity, national original, sex, gender or sexual orientation. The definition now also includes the words “gender identity,” “religious affiliation” (instead of “religion”), and “serious disabilities or disease” (instead of “disability or medical condition”).
Brand new to the “hate speech” section is the statement that “organizations and people dedicated to promoting hatred against these protected groups are not allowed a presence on Facebook”; the request “that Page owners associate their name and Facebook profile with any content that is insensitive, even if that content does not violate our policies”; and the reminder that Facebook gives users “tools to avoid distasteful or offensive content.”
What do you think of the new standards? Are they too details or not detailed enough? Share a comment below or on, well, our Facebook page.