Facebook failed to remove sexualised images of children and then call the police on the BBC

Greebo

Greebo

Greebo

Caporegime
Joined
20 Jan 2005
Posts
45,777
Location
Co Durham
So I heard this story on radio 4 this morning about a BBC investigation into sexual images of children, mainly in closed pedo groups on Facebook and the fact that when the reporter reported 100 images as unsuitable to Facebook, FB only removed 18.

If that wasnt bad enough, when the BBC approached FB and asked them about the 82 images they hadnt removed which clearly means FB doesnt see any problem with the images and asked the BBC to send them to them, FB then cancelled the interview with the BBC and reported them to the Police and replied to the BBC with

It is against the law for anyone to distribute images of child exploitation
Click to expand...

So what does that mean about FB then? If somebody at FB had checked these 82 images then they are either fine or should be reported to the Police. It can't be both.

Doesn't FB have some responsibility to monitor and close down Pedo groups swapping child sex abuse images or at the very least report the members to the Police?

Full story here

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-39187929
 
As much as the sexualisation of children disgusts me and I strongly believe there should be horrifically brutal punishments for those that not openly indulge in the act but also those that facilitate it, it would be a huge undertaking for Facebook to police it effectively.

Sure, they have a moral and surely legal obligations to eradicate it from their platform but when it boils down to the pounds and pence they are there to protect their bottom line and I doubt they want to spend the money putting a more effective system in place when there is no direct pressure from the governments of the world.

The skirmish between FB and the BBC does not interest me at all.
 
To be fair Nick, shouldnt FB at least spend some of its money monitoring whats on FB and anything illegal just refer it to the police?

Or do you think anything should be allowed and they should do nothing?
 
They do already have some relatively sophisticated algorithms in place to automatically stop the posting of and remove pictures that aren't suitable, there's only so much you can do to police such a massive site at the end of the day.

In this case it seems to have come down to one human thinking the images were acceptable according to their guidelines and another not which is always going to be an issue when actual people get involved in moderating things.

Also being the BBC doesn't absolve you from sending potentially illegal pictures around even if it is in the name of journalism.
 
Greebo said:
To be fair Nick, shouldnt FB at least spend some of its money monitoring whats on FB and anything illegal just refer it to the police?

Or do you think anything should be allowed and they should do nothing?
Click to expand...

I think they should spend whatever is necessary to get rid of all activity relating to the sexualisation of children. Will they? Nope. Is it right that they do the bare minimum? Nope.
 
It's Facebook's service, so they are responsible for policing it. They invited the whole world to use it, it's their problem. I'm hoping the courts just order ISPs to block it :D
 
tom_e said:
They do already have some relatively sophisticated algorithms in place to automatically stop the posting of and remove pictures that aren't suitable, there's only so much you can do to police such a massive site at the end of the day.

In this case it seems to have come down to one human thinking the images were acceptable according to their guidelines and another not which is always going to be an issue when actual people get involved in moderating things.

Also being the BBC doesn't absolve you from sending potentially illegal pictures around even if it is in the name of journalism.
Click to expand...

Yeah I thought it was a bit naive of the BBC and they should have just sent links to the pictures on FB rather than the actual images.
 
Surely a better approach is not to remove it, lock the page and send all the details including those who created and uploaded content to the police.

If people start going to jail, there won't be much illegal stuff on facebook.

However, I feel there is more to this then we know. Blindly removing content at least keeps the weirdos out in the open. If you crack the whip hard enough, you are going to turn those people to the darkweb which is much harder to track.
 
BBC should have taken it to whatever relevant law enforcement body (even it there are some issues with regard to international jurisdiction or whatever) if they had concerns after the initial reporting to FB - seems they've tried to use it to make a story rather than doing the right thing.
 
I read this and no way would I be searching for 100 dodgy images journalist or not.

The police will tar everyone with the same peodo brush and try to get that mud off when they have leaked your name to the local gutter press.

but but but.... I'm a journalist for the BBC.... yeah right!

No one would come forward if they stumbled on these sites and in my 7 years of facebooking i've never stumbled on anything like it.

The police don't want you look for this stuff either they have teams trained to catch these scumbags and if your IP pops up several times expect a visit and your pc to be taken away.

Like nick said they don't need joe public intervening.

glen8 said:
Surely a better approach is not to remove it, lock the page and send all the details including those who created and uploaded content to the police.

If people start going to jail, there won't be much illegal stuff on facebook.

However, I feel there is more to this then we know. Blindly removing content at least keeps the weirdos out in the open. If you crack the whip hard enough, you are going to turn those people to the darkweb which is much harder to track.
Click to expand...

Which police force do you take it to?
 
I don't think these images were "dodgy" per se, that's why FB didn't remove them. More normal pictures ( to you or me ) probalbly found all over FB, that some of these sados get off on.
 
Mr.E. said:
I don't think these images were "dodgy" per se, that's why FB didn't remove them. More normal pictures ( to you or me ) probalbly found all over FB, that some of these sados get off on.
Click to expand...

I'd guess this - Pics reported were probably the standard 'jailbait' affair as you find all over 4chan etc rather than straight up abuse, with the context being an interpretation by the non-savvy BBC journalists which Facebook didn't happen to share for whatever reason.
 
The BBC is hardly in a good position to start accusing other organisations of not doing enough to fight paedos.

I'd wager that Facebook deleted photos containing nudity and left up ones containing say 'slutty schoolgirls' simply posing provocatively but clothed. I think they're generally quite hot on any sort of nudity on Facebook/Instagram so it is doubtful they let any actual nudity pictures have a few pass in this instance.
 
Mr.E. said:
I don't think these images were "dodgy" per se, that's why FB didn't remove them. More normal pictures ( to you or me ) probalbly found all over FB, that some of these sados get off on.
Click to expand...

Doesnt make sense. If they werent "dodgy" then why did FB shut down communication and report the BBC to the police for sending them? They obviously viewed the pictures as being sexually of children to report it.

Plus they even kept the one in of the a still shot from a video showing sexual child abuse.
 
Last edited:
No idea about this, but in my experience Facebook are crap at removing violent content. I dread to think what would actually be in breach of their terms of service.
 
Andy90 said:
You report it to CEOP - Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, who are part of the National Crime Agency. Their website can be found at

https://ceop.police.uk/safety-centre/

They will pass the information onto whichever Country/Police Force cover that area.
Click to expand...

Which is what FB did to the BBC after they sent them. They were either clearly of the type that it warranty somebody at FB shutting down all cummication to the BBC and sending them to CEOP, in which case how did those 82 pics get checked as fine when they were flagged on FB?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom