![]() “God has taken it and used it and done things that couldn’t have or even thought of in a hundred years.” She made a few prints and then one day, quite unexpectedly, the image went viral on the internet. So it’s hard to buy that the technology did it and nobody was responsible.”Ī portrait artist, Willard explained that a decade ago she painted the image for herself. companies like this, you can’t talk to a human being, and yet human beings are in fact in charge of the technology. “And Facebook doesn’t really provide an avenue for the general public to comment or complain. “Would it have been corrected if nobody had said anything?” wondered Willard. General religion doesn’t really seem to bother them so much, but the Gospel does.” ![]() “Look at the things that they have blocked - things that lean conservative and especially when it comes to Christ. “‘We didn’t have anything to do with it.’ ‘It just happens.’ ‘The technology did it,’” said Willard, summarizing Facebook’s message. “I feel like Facebook and other social media entities get a pass or expect to get a pass by giving answers like that,” Gaye Frances Willard, the artist who painted the image of the Baby Jesus and Santa in 2009, told LifeSiteNews. LifeSiteNews reached out to Facebook in order to understand how and why the image of Santa adoring the newborn Christchild had been censored as “violent” material not once, but twice.Īfter several days of emails, Facebook offered a one sentence explanation blaming an automation mistake: “Automated systems mistakenly applied a warning to this image which was removed as soon as we identified the error.”įacebook users are now able to freely share the image without any additional step required to view the image. “We err on the side of allowing content, even when some find it objectionable,” declare Facebook’s community standards, saying they do so in order to maintain a “safe environment” for the “Facebook community.” For that reason, we add a warning label to especially graphic or violent content so that it is not available to people under the age of eighteen and so that people are aware of the graphic or violent nature before they click to see it,” the social media giant states. “We also know that people have different sensitivities with regard to graphic and violent content. Users then had to click on a button to uncover the photo.įacebook explains on its site what it means by “ Violence and graphic content”: Last week, LifeSiteNews was made aware that Facebook had once again hidden the touching illustration, slapping the tender image of Santa on one knee and head bowed with the same warning usually reserved for obscene material or photos depicting bloodied victims of terrorism: “Sensitive content … This photo may show violent or graphic content.” ![]() After a December 2018 LifeSiteNews story about the censoring went viral, Facebook relented, removed the warning, and uncovered the painting. Two years ago Facebook first censored the now famous image, identifying it as ‘violent’ or ‘graphic’ content. Decem( LifeSiteNews) - Facebook has once again censored an image of Santa Claus kneeling before the infant Jesus in a manger.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |