No More Nude Babies, says Photobucket
Anne Geddes would be appalled. Photobucket has banned images of babies in nappies from its site, saying that they violate its no-nudity policy. It says the policy applies to people of any age.
This was discovered after a US diaper company running a baby photo competition using Photobucket had all of its entries deleted by the image sharing service. CNET has the full scoop, and while this policy on the surface might seem ridiculous, you can kind of see where it’s coming from. At what age, for example, should they set the nudity cutoff? I’m sure Photobucket doesn’t want to be tackling this kind of issue, so has sensibly decided that there will be zero-tolerance. [CNET]
- Next Post: Bigger Screens Make You More Productive, According to NEC Study »
- « Previous Post: Technology Review’s Top 10 Emerging Technologies of 2008
Comments
But…they’re in nappies. That’s literally not nude. I can understand not wanting nude baby photos so as not to attract creeps, but nappies? Come on! The only way anyone could be offended by a baby in a nappy was if it needed changing (a task I’m well familiar with as my 10 month old son’s stay-at-home caregiver.)
I guess that means they’ll be deleting any shots of diving competitions, photos from beachside holidays, Calvin Klein billboards, etc?
This reminds me why I don’t use Photobucket.
“you can kind of see where it’s coming from”?
You’ve got to be joking?! It’s a baby in a nappy!
If anyone is getting their rocks of to kids of that age, there’s nothing you can do about it! What about people who are into beastiality? Should Photobucket also ban all photos of cows or dogs so they don’t have to tackle that issue as well?
It’s a bloody PC copout, and I for one am sick of this nonsense. Nathan, if you really can see the rationale behind this, this world has already been lost.
This is really pitiful. Only in the USA would the idea of “nude is nasty” be taken to this extent. What a bunch of juveniles. No wonder the world thinks Americans are nuts…starting from the top.
I’m not saying I entirely agree with Photobucket’s position, but I can understand its reason for the policy. I mean, where do you draw the line? 3 years old? 5 years old? At what point is it not OK to show children in nappies/underwear/topless/naked? There comes a grey area where some people will think that a given image crosses the line, while other people think it’s just fine. Photobucket, I’m sure, don’t want to be the decency police or have to negotiate the different interpretations of decency, so they implemented a blanket ban on nudity to save them the hassle. It may seem silly to us, but it probably makes sense for them.
“At what point is it not OK to show children in nappies/underwear/topless/naked?”
At no point is it not okay. That means it’s all fine for non-sexualized nudity. Any age.
This is truly a reflecton of American body phobia gone ever madder. The assumption that all nudity constitutes sexual immorality or will bring imminent harm is wrong. There is no research to substantiate such misconceptions, which are part of why kids grow up to perpetuate this insanity.
I agree. Don’t you just HATE my country?