Carlos Fentanes

Not long time ago Facebook put a warning to a friend’s wall because he posted “inadequate content”. I remember that his account was freeze for 24 hours or so and they ask him no to publish “inadequate content” again, if so, he will be banned from Facebook.

Facebook refers to “Inadequate content” to that that won’t complain their Terms such as pornography, harassment, graphic violence, spam, etc (https://www.facebook.com/legal/terms).

My friend was so angry and he argued that Facebook was wrong; because his posts were not “pornography” but “works of art”, Maybe it’s a valid argument if we think in some famous works of art with nudity content such as the Aphrodite of Milos, The Birth of Venus by Boticcelli, The David by Michelangelo or The Rokeby Venus by Velazquez. There are many examples as these. Is the content of these works inappropriate or is uncomfortable for the spectator?  The answer is NO, like this in capitals, this works are so embedded in the history of the humankind that it’s hard to think that they are harmful or even that they can be censored.

But there are Works of Art where shades are more subtle and this thin line that separates the work of art from “Inadequate content” vanishes. What about Caravaggio’s Amor Vincit
Omnia (“Love Conquers All”) (1601-1602), a painting with an almost photographic finish in which allegory and reality are blended and even through the eyes of the ultraconservative thought of the 21^st century it could be seen not just as pornography but also with pedophile content.

And this is just a work from the 1600’s, what about the art of the second half of the 20^th Century and the contemporary art: The photographers David Hamilton, Andres Serrano or David Lachapelle, with a touch of sexuality very different between them; The series “Made in Heaven” from Jeff Koons and Cicciolina; Takashi Murakami’s Hiropon (1997) and Lonesome Cowboy (1998) or the erotic paintings of John Currin; just to  name a few renowned authors who have works in museums around the world and in the top art galleries. We cannot doubt that these are “real” works of art but nevertheless in the eyes of the common user of Facebook can be “Inadequate content” and they would be reported immediately as porn.

Then, who is right? A work of art, just because is a work of art should be excluded of this policies that try to avoid “Inadequate content”? I don’t think so. Is it good the censorship? Neither. Is the Facebook policy good? I don’t know, maybe not; as a start point I think is not perfect and can be improved with the help of all of us.

200 years ago slavery trade was legal; 100 years: women were not considered citizens and cannot vote and 10 years ago homosexuals cannot get married. Today these laws looks absurd, but in their time they were respected by the common citizen; the same will occurs with these policies, time will change them to some place that we cannot imagine right now, but in this moment we have to respect them, maybe we could try to bend them and if we think that something is wrong we should raise our voice and show our reasons, maybe that will be the trigger for change.