Post
> #Meta has used back-to-school pictures of schoolgirls to advertise one of its social media platforms to a 37-year-old man
> The man noticed that posts encouraging him to “get Threads” (…) were being dropped into his Instagram feed featuring embedded posts of uniformed girls as young as 13 with their faces visible and, in most cases, their names.
> The children’s images were used by Meta after their parents had posted them on Instagram to mark their return to school.
@rysiek Zuckerberg is the dregs of our society. If everyone would get off of all things META, Twitter, drop Amazon, stop using Google and use DuckDuckGo or a Linux alternative to Google and drop You Tube we could put all of these oligarch’s out of business!
There are open source alternatives for every instance. You saw what just happened to Disney. Try to get all of your friends and family to do the right thing, please. #BoycottOligarchs
#BoycottOligarchy #boycottswork #uspol
@rysiek I believe it is illegal even in places as uncivilized as the USA to use identifiable individuals in advertising without a model release.
It doesn't matter what verbiage they put about "using your photos", they're not permitted to use the likeness of a person for commercial purposes without a model release. This is independent of copyright.
@rysiek i guess pedophiles are a worthy audience to target. Sadly, they target them with ads instead of bullets
@rysiek I'm sorry, what the actual fuck??????????????
Yeah, someone in Menlo Park has a very large child porn stash.
@rysiek “The father of a 13-year-old who appeared in one of the posts said it was ’absolutely outrageous‘. The images were all of schoolgirls in short skirts with either bare legs or stockings.”
I posted about this before on Fedi and I will repeat myself: I don't understand skirts. I don't know how society evolved to threat a simple piece of clothing in such way that, at the same time, is threated as "outrageous" (like in the post, what if it was shorts?), forced on woman (like some traditional churches), empowering (like in Kogal fashion).
I find it weird how different cultures have evolved to thread a such piece of clothing in so many weird ways, making it something "gendered" despite the few reasons to do so. Was it common to men to use it in the past?
@rysiek @bmacDonald94 One of the (many) reasons I ended up leaving insta was that one day they decided to start showing me “child gymnast” and “pageant girl” accounts. No amount of “not interested” nor reporting made it go away. I’m 36, no kids, no overlapping interests with kids (and certainly none those ages).
@rysiek Maybe they should have read the terms of service?
But nobody reads the ToS.
And what the hell is up with their PR. Even if intentional, I'd expect Meta's official response to be something like "Oops, sorry, we'll fix that."
But their actual response: "The images shared do not violate our policies."
So they're saying that they are deliberately positing provocative images of underage girls to get the attention of adult men. That is literally the dictionary definition of child pornography, and Meta is distributing it intentionally.
@jmcclure@sciences.social @rysiek@mstdn.social Zuck gonna Zuck ...
Let it never be forgotten that Facebook started out as a project to score and rank college girls on their ... desirability as dates.
A space for Bonfire maintainers and contributors to communicate
