×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Facebook Lets Beheading Clips Return To Its Site

Soulskill posted about 6 months ago | from the heads-will-roll-for-this dept.

Facebook 277

another random user sends this quote from the BBC: "Facebook is allowing videos showing people being decapitated to be posted and shared on its site once again. The social network had placed a temporary ban on the material in May following complaints that the clips could cause long-term psychological damage. The U.S. firm now believes its users should be free to watch and condemn, but not celebrate, such videos. One suicide prevention charity criticized the move. 'It only takes seconds of exposure to such graphic material to leave a permanent trace — particularly in a young person's mind,' said Dr. Arthur Cassidy, a former psychologist who runs a branch of the Yellow Ribbon Program in Northern Ireland. 'The more graphic and colorful the material is, the more psychologically destructive it becomes.' Decapitation videos are available elsewhere on the net — including on Google's YouTube — but critics have raised concern that Facebook's news feeds and other sharing functions mean it is particularly adept at spreading such material."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

277 comments

No boobies though. (5, Insightful)

MightyYar (622222) | about 6 months ago | (#45196541)

Thank God, because that would be obscene!

Re:No boobies though. (4, Interesting)

couchslug (175151) | about 6 months ago | (#45196709)

I can't wait for easy, lifelike CGI so we can post Wholesome Biblical Anecdotes to Facebook.

Let's see how parents try to censor these:

http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/atrocity.html [infidels.org]

Re:No boobies though. (-1, Offtopic)

cold fjord (826450) | about 6 months ago | (#45196887)

Why don't you demonstrate your true manliness and post something more along these lines [theguardian.com] ?

Or do you not want to end up in a video on Facebook or Youtube? Move along, nothing to see .... if you want to keep your head.

No problems there. [theguardian.com] Nope. [thelocal.se] Nope. [mypetjawa.mu.nu] It seems to be a successful strategy for them. You seem to be encouraging it.

South Park Muhammad Cartoon Sparks Jihadi Death Threats [youtube.com]

Re:No boobies though. (1)

Opportunist (166417) | about 6 months ago | (#45197035)

Sadly I don't have the skill to draw good cartoons. Trust me, I have enough ideas that I would have loved to do, sadly I wouldn't be able to draw anything legibly enough to piss off anyone.

Re:No boobies though. (-1, Offtopic)

cold fjord (826450) | about 6 months ago | (#45197117)

Note to self: When the story topic is "beheading videos" one must not mention beheading videos, or the groups responsible for them, or why they might do it. One may only mock Christians.

Re:No boobies though. (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196737)

"Suck a boob, you're an X. Cut it off, you're an R" -- Jack Nicholson on US-Movie-Ratings...

Re:No boobies though. (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197247)

"Say 'nigger', you get down-modded by people who claim to love free speech in every other context." -- Me

Re:No boobies though. (4, Insightful)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about 6 months ago | (#45196777)

It is ironic as a pair of tits, hell a dude ramming another guy/girl up the ass like its the end of the world is FAR less traumatizing than a decapitation video. If someone said you child has to watch 10 hours of porn or one brutal decapitation video id let the kid watch the porn.

Re:No boobies though. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196831)

Can't it be both?

Captcha: propose

Re: No boobies though. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196845)

not in my case---my parents cut off my foreskin and covered my eyes during r-rated movies...the idea is that they won't have to hear about teenage pregnancy because i have no clue what sex is--it worked--my childhood sucked...if i had merely decapitated someone i'd have been sent off and none of the neighbours would be the wiser

Re: No boobies though. (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197051)

> not in my case---my parents cut off my foreskin and covered my eyes during r-rated movies

You were circumcised during an R-rated movie???

If they had any business sense (2)

mozumder (178398) | about 6 months ago | (#45196787)

they would do what advertisers demand. That is Facebook's customers, after all, and where 100% of their revenue comes from.

It seems Facebook is going to learn the hard way that advertisers don't particularly want their brand name right next to a decapitation video.

Really, any advertising-based brand is going to learn the hard way that user-generated content is complete garbage. Ultimately they will ALL be removed, since no advertiser is interested in placing their brand next to a decapitation video or next to a photo of your college friend throwing up.

The real lesson is: There is no reason for any company to allow individuals to express themselves. Individual voices must be silenced in media, in favor of more advertiser friendly views.

Professional media companies know this already - the power of information filterers, editors, and gatekeepers. Professional media companies learned long ago that the average person should never be given a voice, and only the most talented should, after going through a painful vetting process. Editors at media companies spend YEARS perfecting their voice through internships and other voiceless activities.

Amateur media companies like Facebook and YouTube are just finding out how useless they are.

Eventually these amateur media companies will silence individual voices in favor of more professional ones.

The fewer people speak, the better.

Re:No boobies though. (4, Insightful)

tverbeek (457094) | about 6 months ago | (#45196793)

Boobies, dicks, and drawings of imaginary naked people will still get deleted, and the posters put in detention. Photographs that depict actual violent murders are OK, though?

Re:No boobies though. (2)

Opportunist (166417) | about 6 months ago | (#45197047)

Yes, you haven't watched a lot of US TV lately, have you?

Quite frankly, if the average action movie would have to come with the same kind of "action" that the average romance movie has to do with, people would run around pointing their index fingers at each other while screaming "bang bang!"

Apocalypse Now: (5, Interesting)

Hartree (191324) | about 6 months ago | (#45196871)

Colonel Kurtz: "We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write "fuck" on their airplanes because it's obscene."

Human psychology is all kinds of weird.

Re:No boobies though. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196873)

And nothing will help you if those "boobies" are flat and undeveloped. Deleted? Ban? Nope! Jail and entire life screwed over for you!

Re:No boobies though. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196985)

The action is pointless; Facebook requires real world validation before anything is posted. How many decapitations do you think will be shown with this requirement?

No boob jobs though. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197007)

Not as obscene as decapitated boobies.

The way I see it is this... (0)

rsilvergun (571051) | about 6 months ago | (#45197235)

I don't worry about my kids beheading people. I do worry about my kids getting knocked up and/or knocking someone else up.

Re:The way I see it is this... (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197343)

You realize that your kids are your kids even when they reach adulthood. So does your statement still stand throughout time? If so, why did you have kids if you are so intent of erasing your genes from the gene pool?

Seriously, if you think your kids are going to be teenage parents from seeing some nudity, I can tell you that don't know jack shit. Just as much as you shouldn't believe your kid are to become a serial killer just from seeing a beheading video. But the emotional scarring most kids would get from seeing a beheading video is very real. I dare say most adults would be distrubed from watching something like that. Any emotional scarring they get from watching some non-hardcore nudity is most likely to come from their hypocritical parents, trying to deny the existence of nudity or sex in the misdirected interest to "shield" their kids. (Hint to any kids reading this: How do you think you came into this world? "The stork" is the wrong answer.)

Better That Than Tits (5, Informative)

rueger (210566) | about 6 months ago | (#45196547)

Does Facebook still ban breastfeeding pictures? Just wondering.....

Yup.

FB page Bitchin' Parents is the latest to be targeted by FB censors for sharing their members breastfeeding images. As a result they have been asking members to share their BF images here instead. Incredibly sad this is still an issue on FB. http://www.facebook.com/ParentsUncut [facebook.com]

Re:Better That Than Tits (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197095)

So if you really want to stop the beheading videos on FB the logical solution is to have tits tattooed on your forehead when you're going to the middle-east.

Re:Better That Than Tits (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197307)

In several incidents I reported extremist Sunni/Wahabi groups in Facebook and the website rejected my complain.

One of the groups is "Anti Christian, Anti Shia" (basically Anti anything other than hardliner Sunni Islam) movement of Malaysia organized by hardliner Sunni and Wahabis in Malaysia. The group has 45000 members and they did not do anything about it.

BDSM plz plz ..... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196577)

BDSM plz plz .....

Re:BDSM plz plz ..... (2)

Shavano (2541114) | about 6 months ago | (#45196913)

Nope, that's banned apparently because (a) the behavior is consensual and (b) nobody dies.

This is not about free speech (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196593)

If I walk into just about any decent sized store or public building (large enough to have security) and start shouting political slogans, I'll be escorted out of the building. Facebook and Google own their premises and can and should enforce whatever policies they think is appropriate, above and beyond what the law requires.

It's common sense that videos glorifying machete violence against humans should be banned. If that doesn't occur to Zuckerberg and Page immediately, they are thinking way too hard.

Re:This is not about free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196753)

What? [facebook.com]

Re:This is not about free speech (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 6 months ago | (#45196761)

More than just machetes... I've seen them with machetes, sure, but plain knives and even once with a chainsaw. Apparently part of the machismo code for the Mexican drug gangs is that you don't react while you're being beheaded.

Re:This is not about free speech (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196811)

Facebook owns the platform but social media relies on users sharing both points of view, personal information and commentary, without it what does there platform become ? people are entitled to freedom of speech, why have an exclusion zone on social media ?

Re:This is not about free speech (1)

duke_cheetah2003 (862933) | about 6 months ago | (#45197133)

It's common sense that videos glorifying machete violence against humans should be banned. If that doesn't occur to Zuckerberg and Page immediately, they are thinking way too hard.

You haven't been here long, have you? Common sense is in short supply here.

Why? (1)

jfdavis668 (1414919) | about 6 months ago | (#45196601)

would anyone post that, or watch it?

Re:Why? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196685)

People need to be informed that America is evil.

Re:Why? (1, Informative)

AHuxley (892839) | about 6 months ago | (#45196721)

The posting is for war propaganda. You have the US backed freedom fighters showing what they do in liberated areas.
You have other groups showing what happens when the US backed freedom fighters take an area over and start cleaning up.
It also helps the sockpuppets offer a why the Anglosphere has to stay in parts of the world diatribe.
Basically a lot of CIA backed NGO's and freedom fighters offering both sides of their fav dirty wars.
Web 2.0 is seen as part of that effort. You also have the USA telco/NSA aspect - better to have it on a US friendly network :)

Re:Why? (5, Informative)

BenJeremy (181303) | about 6 months ago | (#45196765)

Except in this case, it is an Islamist who beheaded his wife for "cheating" on him. ...AND it managed to get 2500 likes on Facebook. Way to go , Facebook, that sure looks like condemnation.

I guess restricting beheading videos would be considered racist.

Meanwhile, posting pictures of a girl's head and elbows while she's in a bath, suggesting (only to the lame Facebook censors who have never seen an actual naked woman) boobies will get you banned.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about 6 months ago | (#45196739)

Good question. The other night an old coworker I was friends with posted one of those decapitation videos. I have never seen anything more disturbing in my life. A masked thug (presumably a mexican cartel goon) cuts a womans head off ...... with a fucking box cutter or small knife. No quick chop and lights out. No this was a brutal murder in which this guy starts slicing around her neck like she was a side of beef until her head comes off. And she was fully conscious and alive when he started.

Why did I watch it? I honestly have no idea. Morbid curiosity perhaps? At first I thought it was fake thinking why would someone post something this fucking horrible on FB. I am sorry I did. Damn video has been haunting me for the past few days. Nothing bad but I keep thinking of it every now and then, that poor woman.

One this it does illustrate though is how the wonderful war on drugs has given those shit stains on the underwear of humanity the ability to do this almost entirely unchecked.

Re:Why? (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 6 months ago | (#45196803)

The Mexican cartels are some pretty fucked up dudes. I've seen the full gamut: axe, machete, small knife, chainsaw. I'm a long, long way from squeamish, and a couple of them even bugged me a little.

Re:Why? (5, Insightful)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about 6 months ago | (#45196859)

Im not the squeamish type either but watching a person who has done nothing wrong cut up like a piece of meat is beyond fucked. The disturbing part isnt the blood or the head coming off but the fact that someone is so apathetic that they can butcher someone and not think twice. Especially if that someone has done no harm to anyone else. Those guys make serial killers like dahmer, bundy and gacy look like mouseketeers. At least they had a drive and motivation. These guys are doing it as if its nothing, just another day on the job.

Re:Why? (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 6 months ago | (#45196919)

I don't think I'd categorize the people executed by the cartels as innocents. If the bonds were on the other set of hands, they'd be just as happy to wield the knife.

Re:Why? (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197017)

I don't think I'd categorize the people executed by the cartels as innocents. If the bonds were on the other set of hands, they'd be just as happy to wield the knife.

Except for, you know, the journalists who are targetet, executed, and their corpses put on public display because they dared to report on these wastes of flesh.

Re:Why? (1)

LoRdTAW (99712) | about 6 months ago | (#45197097)

Wait, what?

"I don't think I'd categorize the people executed by the cartels as innocents."
Then what would you categorize them as? Please elaborate.

"If the bonds were on the other set of hands, they'd be just as happy to wield the knife."

Why would they be happy to kill in such a brutal manner? What would be their motivation to do so? The cartel shit stains are getting paid to do it and go to the extremes to send a clear message. And they aren't ordinary men, these are cold, callous monsters plain and simple.

Re:Why? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196851)

Some of us are sick fucks.

Re:Why? (2)

artor3 (1344997) | about 6 months ago | (#45197011)

It's the modern goatse. Some people get perverse pleasure in forcing other people to witness terrible things against their will. Some of their victims later decide to show how tough and unfazed they are by trying to find something even worse to post.

This isn't a free speech issue. Facebook isn't the government. They were wrong to change this policy -- it's making the site friendly to mentally ill trolls, and worse for everyone else. Even from a strictly amoral, financial viewpoint, it's a bad decision.

All for Cash (3, Interesting)

TranquilVoid (2444228) | about 6 months ago | (#45196607)

From the company that removes photos of breastfeeding mothers...

To be 'fair' I've noticed that, since they went public, they've been a lot more permissive with the soft porn pages. You probably still can't show nipples, but labia outlines through a bikini are apparently fine. It's all a short-term grab for eyeballs and advertising dollars.

As far as I know Facebook doesn't have an 18+ category like YouTube so this move does a bit blunt.

scarred for life, eh? (2)

rubycodez (864176) | about 6 months ago | (#45196621)

killing innocents by drones and dumping ordinance, also scarring relatives, friends, neighbors, rescuers minds: good. posting video of beheading: bad posting video of breastfeeding, sex, or just being naked: bad

ok, got it.

Re:scarred for life, eh? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196643)

Yes, because one can't object to beheading videos and the drone war at the same time.

ok, got it.

Facebook should stop banning anything. (3, Insightful)

pauljlucas (529435) | about 6 months ago | (#45196627)

Facebook should get out of the censorship/banning business. You should only be able to report things that are against the law, e.g., child pornography. If you don't like anything else, don't look.

If it's on a page you've "liked," unlike the page and stop following it. If a friend posts something you don't like, either learn to accept your friend is his or her entirety, or simply unfollow or unfriend your friend. Facebook shouldn't be your nanny.

Re:Facebook should stop banning anything. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196725)

Against whose law? What's against the law in one place is religion in another.

A civilized society can draw a line. Allowing material that glorifies or incites people to murder over religious beliefs is nothing but cowardice.

Re:Facebook should stop banning anything. (4, Interesting)

foobar bazbot (3352433) | about 6 months ago | (#45196733)

Facebook should get out of the censorship/banning business. You should only be able to report things that are against the law, e.g., child pornography.

Devil's advocate:
I'd rather not have Facebook telling people "We only remove illegal content; if you don't wanna see beheading videos, take it up with your Congressman.", because it's all too believable that some congressclown would take up the challenge, and push through legislation making such content illegal.

The rest of the internet is clearly better off if prominent sites such as Facebook engage in censorship, because this reduces the number of idiots getting riled about it and therefore the odds that the government applies censorship to the whole internet. Now whether this benefit to the rest of the internet is worth the harm of having Facebook censored is ... debatable, at best, but there is a not-absurd argument there.

Re:Facebook should stop banning anything. (4, Interesting)

Shavano (2541114) | about 6 months ago | (#45196925)

1. Facebook has to obey local laws in jurisdictions where it operates, thus, no kiddy porn or [em]animal[/em] cruelty in the USA.

2. Facebook is an advertising company. If their sponsors don't like it, it's verboten.

3. Facebook sponsors apparently like snuff films, but not sex.

Re:Facebook should stop banning anything. (2)

artor3 (1344997) | about 6 months ago | (#45197045)

Facebook should be in the business business. If they can make more money by making the site more family friendly, at the cost of kicking out some of the dregs of 4chan, they should do so. Hell, they have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.

Free speech means the government doesn't control what you say. It doesn't mean that everyone has to let you post pornography on their property.

Re:Facebook should stop banning anything. (3, Insightful)

pauljlucas (529435) | about 6 months ago | (#45197169)

Facebook should be in the business business. If they can make more money by making the site more family friendly, at the cost of kicking out some of the dregs of 4chan, they should do so. Hell, they have an obligation to their shareholders to do so.

They can accomplish the same thing by allowing people to self-tag posts as "adult." (Or they could even have several tags such as "violence", "sex", etc.) Minors wouldn't be able to see such content (based on what tags their parents allow them to see). At worst, adult content that's not self-tagged as such would simply be tagged as such by Facebook if/when they're alerted to it. Adults who've chosen not to filter their content will get to see everything. It's a win-win and it's certainly better than outright banning.

Not for facebook (2)

jblues (1703158) | about 6 months ago | (#45196639)

There are plenty of other places people can see these videos. I don't think it should be on Facebook.

Re:Not for facebook (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196791)

There are plenty of other places people can see these videos. I don't think it should be on Facebook.

why is that ? is there some reason that the basic human right of freedom of speech should somehow have an exclusion zone on social media, unfortunately freedom of speech is a double edged sword, while you may like some things being discussed and argued you may be vehemently revolted and aghast by other things people say and show, they still have a right to voice there opinions and to show those barbaric acts occurring such as beheading, just because you do not agree is irrelevant, you have the choice to not watch or listen about these acts, these people have a right to voice there opinions and show these acts occurring, you also have the freedom of speech to protest peoples freedom of speech your opinion is your own, and this is just my opinion both of which we are entitled to.
     

Re:Not for facebook (0)

Scott Ragen (3378093) | about 6 months ago | (#45196979)

While you're right, the freedom of speech applies to government not restricting your freedom. Facebook is perfectly within its rights to restrict whatever it likes.

I agree that governments censoring is a bad thing but private corporations should censor if it within their policy. I don't want to watch beheading videos, and I won't want my children to when they're old enough to use facebook/G+/whatever if they wish to. It is called "creating a safe environment".
Perhaps I should go to my children's school and show the beheading videos there too since its freedom of speech? No.

Re:Not for facebook (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197171)

Yes, Facebook should only be for giving away our privacy! Enough of these tasteless pictures or videos.

Chop someone's head off (1, Insightful)

msobkow (48369) | about 6 months ago | (#45196659)

...and you're good to go.

But heaven forbid you should show a nipple!

Art (1)

JazzXP (770338) | about 6 months ago | (#45196689)

That's nice that something grotesque is allowed, but me trying to post some artistic nudes (even with everything hidden) get taken down...

More "graphic material" needed? (2)

iamhigh (1252742) | about 6 months ago | (#45196693)

Sometimes I wonder if the lack of "graphic material" has caused a dissonance from death. As a young kid my father killed pigs so they could eat (or at least watched it). He saw them get sick and die. Several family members died unexpectedly in his youth. He had real life experience with death.

Granted, I never did any of that as I didn't grow up on a farm, nor did I experience unexpected family deaths, and I came out pretty normal. Maybe it takes two generations. Even those in richer families 100 years ago were much more exposed to death than the average kid is now.

One of you psych grads now working in IT [slashdot.org] , does that make any sense?

Re:More "graphic material" needed? (0)

demonlapin (527802) | about 6 months ago | (#45196827)

Want some graphic material? Search for "evil does not need guns" and watch the video at liveleak. The action starts at about 3:00. NSFW, and they don't both die the same way.

Re:More "graphic material" needed? (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197205)

I usually hate spoilers, but I wish I had a spoiler for this one that prevented me from watching it.

1. Two guys describe their jobs to the adversary drug gang. The thin one mentions he was risking his life for less than 30 USD.
2. The thin one gets decapitated with a chainsaw quickly.
3. The chubby guy gets decapitated with a knife, slow and terrible. The sound he makes while gasping for air is terrible.
4. The murderer puts the chubby guy's head over his body, it falls.

I really recommend not watching it, I don't know why I did.

Re:More "graphic material" needed? (1)

demonlapin (527802) | about 6 months ago | (#45197293)

Interesting. Don't speak enough Spanish to really understand what they were saying myself.

BTW, if you think the chubby guy sounded bad, I've heard a lot worse in some similar videos. Really gruesome.

Re:More "graphic material" needed? (1)

Jimbookis (517778) | about 6 months ago | (#45197207)

I agree we do lived in a death and gore sanitised world. I don't like such gore as entertainment like we get now with Dexter or any number of other splatter fantasies as it's not tempered in the west with the agony of injury and pain and the finality of death. Gimme living boobs anyday for entertainment! I remember visiting an Indian friends house and a newspaper he had showed a large front page picture of the woman who blew up Rajif Ghandi pieced back together as much as possible - head, arms and legs only. It was pretty jolting to see as a teenager but I think the West needs more of such doses reality.

About the worst thing to be shared online (3, Funny)

Haoie (1277294) | about 6 months ago | (#45196703)

Just imagine this posted on your timeline:

"Hey dude, I just saw this guy get his head lopped off and I totally thought of you!"

But think of the children! (2, Insightful)

dkleinsc (563838) | about 6 months ago | (#45196705)

I'm against all censorship. Period. Including of things that are horrific.

It's not like you can really shield people completely from the horrific violence of the world. In some places, the kids not only see it, but they're forced to be a part of it as child soldiers. In other places, kids aren't supposed to see it, but are encouraged to enjoy a fantasy version of that horrific violence so that they'll grow up into 18-year-olds who want to join the military service and kill people. In lots of places, even the kids who aren't supposed to go into the service (typically because their parents are rich enough) get exposed to horrific violence via something called "evening news". At best, you can try to create a fantasy bubble in which the bad stuff only happens in places very far away from where you are - this usually involves willfully ignoring the assaults, murders, robberies, rapes, car crashes, etc that are probably happening fairly close to you right now.

Also, the reaction of children to real violence is the same as adults: horror. They might enjoy a good scare in October at a haunted house or a murder mystery story, but the real thing leaves kids (and lots of adults) crying, screaming in fear, defacating, vomiting, etc. If you want a sure way to get kids to not want to behead themselves or anyone else, showing them a real beheading is a pretty good way of doing it.

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196977)

You clearly have no children if that's how you think they should be raised. I hope you're not allowed near children

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197065)

Too late. At least for me. I totally agree with dkleinsc and have two kids of my own. My 3 year old wasn't even a bit phased by the videos. My 11 year was like 'cool'. And before you think I'm mad there isn't any doubt this is disturbing. That doesn't mean it should be censored. It's simply showing us the reality of the world we live in. I'm less concerned about this than what the US government is doing to us. The criminal justice system is a joke. There is no justice and the victims are primarily those within it. The violators are not the ones effected by the 'criminals' arrested. It is the police, judges, lawyers, prosecutors, guards, wardens, politicians, and you! You have this idea that justice is getting revenge. That's f'd up. Personally I'd rather make life a breeze for those incarcerated. These are the people who have been most victimized. More so than anybody else. You don't get into a life of violent crime (or otherwise) without some environmental or psychological problem and chances are it isn't self-inflicted. Being harmed by such crime is a matter of life. Deal with it (as much as that sucks, and yes, we should try to help those negatively impacted take the brunt, but no less or no more than those who acted in ways which were violating another).

Re:But think of the children! (5, Insightful)

Scott Ragen (3378093) | about 6 months ago | (#45196997)

Serious question, are you a father?

Are you suggesting I should show my 5 year old son a beheading video? I love my son and want to protect him from harm, both physical and psychological. When he is old enough, and curious enough to view these things he will in his own time.
Suggesting that because other children experience this is it ok for mine to see it is not a good reason. Why do you think violence transcends generations?

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197027)

If you want a sure way to get kids to not want to behead themselves or anyone else, showing them a real beheading is a pretty good way of doing it.

Unless they really are suicidally depressed. People in such states are looking through a different lens. They could - okay they will see things like this and start craving their own death even more. Just like it is a bad idea to leave a gun in the house of someone suicidal, so are images like these.

Re:But think of the children! (4, Insightful)

artor3 (1344997) | about 6 months ago | (#45197089)

In some places, the kids not only see [horrific violence], but they're forced to be a part of it as child soldiers.

So... what? Since pedophiles exist we should force all children to watch child pornography?

Just-World thinking contributes to mental health. Forcing people to see all the morbid shit that goes on just depresses them. There is no upside. Just spreading misery. It's not like we could fix the armies of child soldiers just by getting a bit more awareness *coughkony2012cough*.

If you want a sure way to get kids to not want to behead themselves or anyone else, showing them a real beheading is a pretty good way of doing it.

You have absolutely no evidence of that. In fact, you have evidence against it: the child soldiers you referenced. They witness lots of horror. It doesn't stop them from participating. If anything, it desensitizes them.

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197311)

That ain't a bad thing. We're already too sensitive. Less censorship would be a *good thing*.

There is zero scientific evidence this stuff leads to anything. There are lots of meaningless studies you can point to. The problem is they aren't scientific and the results can't be relied upon. IE If you do a study in a prison for instance your going to find all the pedophiles are criminals. There is no scientific way to reliably pull data from the non-criminal group because of societal criminalization. That is just a good easy to understand and follow example. Despite that there are lots of studies which try and make connections and yet overlook the glaring flaws in there own studies. Then again- many of those studies are themselves biased.

This long term detriment stuff is baseless. If people are actually negatively impacted long term they have deeper psychological issues and were already f'd. It almost certainly wouldn't have mattered either way if they had seen the supposedly harmful pictures. The only difference is they'd end up pointing to something else (like a mother breastfeeding). If even that's non-existent they'd point to the communists, liberals, conservatives, etc.

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197131)

Watching horrific violence is bad for you; you start thinking that assaults, murders, robberies, rapes, car crashes etc are the norm and that your kids might start beheading each other unless they're shown how it's done.

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197145)

yes but on fb? that is supposed and intended to be accesses by younger folk?

widespread, easy (key words) exposure leads to general acceptance in society

at least that's true for pornography :P

Re:But think of the children! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197197)

I saw one beheading video - I think it was Daniel Pearl's - and it was the most atrocious thing I have seen in my life. I am sorry that I clicked on it. All of these anti-violence in movies and video games groups are idiots - there was literally a magnitudes of difference between anything I have seen on TV or in a video game and this beheading video. Even the jihadi or US military videos on liveleak are so far beneath the sheer terror and horror that the Daniel Pearl video showed.

So Facebook is going to expose all of these young children who use it to these horrific videos. Fuck Facebook. Never used it, never will....and I am not pro censorship...the opposite...but this is just too much.

Only (based) In America (4, Insightful)

hyades1 (1149581) | about 6 months ago | (#45196781)

So death porn is fine, but if you try to post a picture of a woman breastfeeding, they'll crap-can it and threaten to close your account faster than a businessman can pick a pocket.

Must be American.

Should fix their stock price.... (0)

bricko (1052210) | about 6 months ago | (#45196839)

Once this hits Drudge.....will be too funny. Although I do miss watching a few ragheads make fools of them selves in front of the world. That is why Islam will never be much more than 3rd world dog shit pseudo religion.

Insanity (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196951)

America. Where a half-second flash of a boob causes an outcry, but videos of people being decapitated with a chainsaw is just dandy.

LOL (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196973)

If you see it and watch it anyway, and end up with severe damage, you already were severely damaged. No loss.

What happens to people and what happens after that, is up to them, no one else's problem. They make the best of their choices, or not.

Lesson Learned (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45196999)

Google is not being condemned, despite them showing the video... but Facebook, who re-introduced the videos? Condemnation! Bastards. Don't worry about Google though.

For the record, I generally like Google as a company. On the other hand, I REALLY dislike Facebook (and my dislike starts at the top).. But I recognise the hypocrisy and will defend anyone (even a CEO that I think is a complete asshat) if they deserve it. I also support Facebook's new decision, even though I won't watch the videos myself.

Oh Fun Facebook: The Real World Invites (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197025)

Gladiolus Zuckerburg Thumbs Up Beheading.

Why!

His financial backers and sexual slaves [Ah, Oh dear, there I go again, Sorry Princes Bride], are in Saudi Arabia stupid!

Lets hope that Gladiolus does not authorize Penis Beheading.

Ha ha :-D

I don't believe people are injured by content (1)

kawabago (551139) | about 6 months ago | (#45197079)

If they are already having destructive thoughts, what they look at isn't the problem!

This policy will change (1)

onyxruby (118189) | about 6 months ago | (#45197119)

This policy will change just as soon as someone posts a beheading video of a friend or family member of a high ranking executive of Google or Facebook. Until it's personal it's an abstract that gets clicks and makes money.

Meanwhile they will zealously block the boob in the name of family values. America, where boobs are abhorrent and snuff videos are protected for profit. Something is very wrong here.

If you have a problem with videos on the Internet, (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197163)

then don't fucking watch them and stfu.

Gore (1)

Aguchi69 (3404953) | about 6 months ago | (#45197249)

Didn't think one could find these videos on YouTube, but apparently they are there and if that's the case why not throw in a little porn then? Now I have to reevaluate my censorship stance.

Logically (1)

Tarlus (1000874) | about 6 months ago | (#45197267)

Then they should allow fully uncensored hardcore pornography.

I mean, if it's so people can condemn it and not celebrate it.

Moral fail (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 6 months ago | (#45197297)

I guess it's time to cut ties with Facebook. Sometimes people have to do what's morally right, not what's allowed. In this case, Facebook has made the wrong choice. Good riddance.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...