Child Porn Goes Viral On Facebook: Report

[Claire Diviner]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/03/22/child-porn-viral-facebook_n_2932673.html

There are several reports of child pornography going viral on Facebook Thursday.

A source told BuzzFeed that, by 9 p.m. Thursday night, a pornographic video of an infant had over 16,000 shares.

As the video started popping up in people's Facebook newsfeeds, users took to Twitter to voice their outrage:

Gawker reports that the video, which apparently showed "a grown man sexually abusing an infant girl" got 32,000 shares and 5,000 likes before Facebook wiped it off the site after eight hours.

Gawker pointed out that many of the shares appear to have come from users who were disgusted by the content, not those trying to spread its contents to others.

In a statement obtained by the Daily Mail, a Facebook spokesperson wrote, 'We have zero tolerance for child pornography being uploaded onto Facebook and are extremely aggressive in preventing and removing child exploitive content. We are pleased that this material was reported to us quickly enabling its swift removal."

If you come across a post on Facebook that you believe could be child porn, report it here, instead of sharing it.

32,000 shares and 5,000 likes?! That's not even including those who must've sat through and watched the whole thing. What does that tell you about the people on social media sites? I swear people are twisted.

 

[Holder of the Heel]

"shares appear to have come from users who were disgusted by the content, not those trying to spread its contents to others."

wut

 

[Ussi]

Perhaps the sharing was to get it reported and taken down faster

Tbh i don't think it matters if it was a child or not, it wouldn't have belonged on facebook either way. The whole child thing is just being magnified. The moral outrage is probably just feeding the troll who did it

 

[Claire Diviner]

The sad thing is, other than having taken the video down, I don't think Facebook will do anything about it in the way of investigations, or trying to track the IP of the video's source, regardless if anything can actually be done or not.

 

[Shorts]

Oh my GAWD. This is the type of porn you know exists, but never wanna hear about. Sweet ****ing jesus that's awful.

 

[♖♘♗♔♕♗♘♖]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/mobileweb/2013/03/22/child-porn-viral-facebook_n_2932673.html 32,000 shares and 5,000 likes?! That's not even including those who must've sat through and watched the whole thing. What does that tell you about the people on social media sites? I swear people are twisted.

Are you calling yourself twisted or have you just failed to read your own article. Or are you just incognizant that your attitude and behavior in sharing this news is analogous to the reaction of the people who shared this video to others. Because if you were aware that the majority of volume for this video was generated off of dislike for this video, then your own compulsion to share your disgust of the video is self-explanatory of the core behavior of how people use the internet as an immediate emotional response mechanism. As for the 5,000 likes, when anything becomes popular and has enough people viewing it, erratic behavior and misdemeanor is more likely to occur on the internet... than not to occur i.e. 4chan posted the video on a message board and then members "liked" the video to see how other people would react.

Gawker pointed out that many of the shares appear to have come from users who were disgusted by the content, not those trying to spread its contents to others.

 

[Claire Diviner]

Are you calling yourself twisted or have you just failed to read your own article.

I never saw the video, nor did I share it. This article was how I found out it even existed, so get your facts straight. Also, one has to ask just how many is "many", since out of 32,000, "many" is too vague a word.

 

[ndayday]

People tend to like to discuss why things are bad instead of ****ing reporting the thing that is bad.

Source(s):
6 years of internet forums

 

[Claire Diviner]

People tend to like to discuss why things are bad instead of ****ing reporting the thing that is bad.

Probably explains why it was circulating around Facebook for as long as it did.

 

[theeboredone]

Can't FB just find the original uploader? I mean, even if he wasn't the...prime suspect in the video, just the fact he uploaded it should be a crime enough.

Edit: I read into a few other sites about this, and it seems like this video is actually from 2005. The person who recently uploaded it, did it in create "awareness" basically.

 

[deepseadiva]

Are you calling yourself twisted or have you just failed to read your own article. Or are you just incognizant that your attitude and behavior in sharing this news is analogous to the reaction of the people who shared this video to others. Because if you were aware that the majority of volume for this video was generated off of dislike for this video, then your own compulsion to share your disgust of the video is self-explanatory of the core behavior of how people use the internet as an immediate emotional response mechanism. As for the 5,000 likes, when anything becomes popular and has enough people viewing it, erratic behavior and misdemeanor is more likely to occur on the internet... than not to occur i.e. 4chan posted the video on a message board and then members "liked" the video to see how other people would react.

Well said.

As sad as the internet is as a whole, I doubt all the posts where made by pedos. Just a bunch of soccer moms clicking around saying "OMG ISN'T THIS GROSS AND HORRIBLE SHARE TO HAVE THIS BANNED".

I'm sad I missed the debacle though. Interesting breach of FB security and policy.

 

[TheKalmarKing]

Now this is disgusting. It's not just pre-ado porn, heck, I could stand it. It's infant porn. I swear, Facebook is one of the most disgusting public websites ever (And I won't talk about the stupid ugly girls posting tons of pictures saying "Lulz I'm beautiful").

Reminds me the time where a friend posted a porn pic as a cover picture. Hey, we understood he was a sick guy at least.

 

[♖♘♗♔♕♗♘♖]

I never saw the video, nor did I share it. This article was how I found out it even existed, so get your facts straight. Also, one has to ask just how many is "many", since out of 32,000, "many" is too vague a word.

The foci of my point wasn't that you specifically saw the video in question. Rather the fact that your immediate response to reading the article was to post + spread it here is analogous to the reaction of those who may have seen the video and proceeded to spread it to others to watch. Disgust in the material prompted you to inform other people of the information, therefore escalating the attention and popularity of the subject. Pragmatically speaking there is no method to measure disgust, it is likely that "many" was used to generalize the negative comments and feedback on the video page + twitter in order to gauge that most people were spreading this because they were upset about the content of the video which is what spawned the high share rate. Which again prompts me to link back to this comment.

What does that tell you about the people on social media sites? I swear people are twisted.

I think it shows that an intrinsic behavior in social media sites is to share anything and everything that has emotional relevance to a person in question. Twitter's tweets, facebook statuses, tumblr pics, and forum threads like the Unhappy/Happy Thread are all examples of an increasing push on the internet to move towards a "feel it, post it" type of social atmosphere. I don't believe that people disseminate this video with bad intentions because it wouldn't play well with the people who they are sharing it with in most cases. I think that this video became popular because people wanted to share their disgust of their video in order to gain some level of self-gratification. Because something like, "I can't believe this..." makes them feel better at the end of the day that they got it off their chest. Ultimately the video itself has less importance to most people than how the video affected them emotionally. That's usually how things work when it comes to people who contribute content to social media sites.

 

[Claire Diviner]

The foci of my point wasn't that you specifically saw the video in question. Rather the fact that your immediate response to reading the article was to post + spread it here is analogous to the reaction of those who may have seen the video and proceeded to spread it to others to watch. Disgust in the material prompted you to inform other people of the information, therefore escalating the attention and popularity of the subject. Pragmatically speaking there is no method to measure disgust, it is likely that "many" was used to generalize the negative comments and feedback on the video page + twitter in order to gauge that most people were spreading this because they were upset about the content of the video which is what spawned the high share rate. Which again prompts me to link back to this comment.

While true, the difference is that I'm not spreading or sharing such content. I would've just reported it without even watching it.

I think it shows that an intrinsic behavior in social media sites is to share anything and everything that has emotional relevance to a person in question. Twitter's tweets, facebook statuses, tumblr pics, and forum threads like the Unhappy/Happy Thread are all examples of an increasing push on the internet to move towards a "feel it, post it" type of social atmosphere. I don't believe that people disseminate this video with bad intentions because it wouldn't play well with the people who they are sharing it with in most cases. I think that this video became popular because people wanted to share their disgust of their video in order to gain some level of self-gratification. Because something like, "I can't believe this..." makes them feel better at the end of the day that they got it off their chest. Ultimately the video itself has less importance to most people than how the video affected them emotionally. That's usually how things work when it comes to people who contribute content to social media sites.

In hindsight, perhaps, though it's still chilling to think it had 5,000 likes on top of the 32,000 shares.

 

[Bowser D.X]

CP is but enough but IP?

 

[JoshCube2]

Child porn is hilarious.

 

[Falconv1.0]

Child porn is hilarious.

Watching you get banned will be even more hilarious.

 

[JoshCube2]

Watching you get banned will be even more hilarious.

LMFAO.