Samrawit Gougsa,

Editor (Businnes)

WASHINGTON DC — Facebook has caused a stir amongst the public over its controversial decision to lift a ban on violent video posts, including beheadings. The social networking website’s temporary ban was put into place in May this year after complaints were made over the allowance of videos on the social networking site that portrayed images of decapitation. Facebook took action by removing the reported videos and announcing it would review its policy on users posting videos with graphic material of this nature.

This week the company broke its silence and made a decision over the policy. Facebook now takes the view that videos with graphic content such as beheadings are allowed to be posted on the website, as long as each video’s intent is to raise awareness rather than glorifying violence. As soon as news of Facebook’s ban lift spread on October 22, the company clarified its position and said it would review videos of graphic content on an individual basis and then make a call over the intent behind each piece.

Facebook spokesman Matt Steinfeld stated that the company would “take a more holistic look at the context surrounding a violent image or video, and will remove content that celebrates violence” but would allow some content “of public interest or concern.”

The firm removed an explicit video that sparked outrage this spring, depicting a woman’s beheading. It was taken off the social networking website under the ban in May but after careful review it was allowed back online once the ban was lifted. Referring to the decapitation video, a spokesperson for Facebook told CNN Money that “if the video were being celebrated, or the actions in it encouraged, our approach would be different.”

The company said warnings might be displayed before graphic videos are viewed. Facebook’s decision to alter its policy, which was first reported by BBC, received backlash from its users and from others on Twitter. “It’s irresponsible of Facebook to post beheading videos, especially without a warning. They must explain their actions to worried parents,” tweeted British Prime Minister David Cameron.

Cameron has criticised graphic videos before when he made it a focal point during his time in office to ban pornography in order to protect the innocence of children in England. It could be argued that this new policy provides a gateway for certain types of extreme content to dodge existing filters. Facebook forbids posts of nudity, drug use and pornography- all restrictions that will stay in place.

A question risen from this controversy is how Facebook can permit scenes of extreme violence to surface on its website but may sometimes find itself demanding images of breastfeeding mothers to be taken down. Is the image of a woman’s breastfeeding a child more offensive and graphic than images of a woman being decapitated? Furthermore, the policy shift shines a light on Facebook’s role as a social media website.  The debate has sparked as to whether the website acts as a content platform or a news publisher.

Facebook says the role it seeks to play entails providing a platform where people can share their experiences and talk about what is going on in the world. It does this by linking people and encourgaing users to share photos, thoughts, news links, videos and many more forms of media.

As of March 2013, Facebook has 1.15 billion registered users, meaning its new policy on graphic videos would affect a significant number of people in the world. With a simple click of the ‘share’ button, an explicit video of a woman’s head being chopped off can hop from one profile to another and end up going viral. Therefore the social networking site is a powerful tool when attempting to raise awareness on issues such as beheadings. However, what exactly determines the difference between ‘raising awareness’ on the topic of beheading and ‘glorifying violence’?

Could Facebook’s attempt backfire?

Image Courtesy:

Image Courtesy: © SKopp | Wikimedia Commons

Samrawit Gougsa

Correspondent