Protests on the social platform have entered a new phase, with users shirking the platform’s NSFW content rules en masse. The development has some media buyers on high alert, experts say.

  • AnonymousLlama@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    2 years ago

    I remember recently they changed some of their NSFW language rules, people had the shits and 6 weeks later they changed them again. This one guy who makes summaries of r/amitheasshole changed how he says it to ‘am I the butt hole’

    It’s silly crap like that which is the most annoying, trying to censor the most mundane swear words.

    • Itty53@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      2 years ago

      But it’s silly crap like that that matters to advertisers. NSFW actually is the word “fuck”, “asshole”, etc. You might be able to say that at work, not everyone can without repercussion.

      And that’s not a stretch at all, it’s why network television won’t let you say either of those words either. Not next to their Ford and Samsung advertisements.

      The entire premise of NSFW is silly to me. Like no one has an obligation to make sure YOU are safely browsing at work. Get back to work.

      • Frog-Brawler@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        2 years ago

        The NSFW flag is a really good idea in my opinion. It’s a compromise. It’s like saying “we’re still going to have content that might not go over well with all audiences, or all settings; but you just have to mark it as such so that someone ELSE that happens to see the screen doesn’t have a shit fit.” I feel like it protects me, as the viewer. If I want to look at a picture of a party of lemons, then I know that what I’m about to click might cause me to get a bunch of shit from my conservative co-worker. Maybe I’ll wait for her to leave the room, and then I’ll click the link about the party of lemons.

      • burgundymyr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        If you don’t at least have reliable NSFW flags then many parents (and more importantly schools) won’t let their kids watch, which is a large part of ad revenue.

        • Itty53@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          “Warnings about explicit content work” is a new take to me. The history of such direct warnings tells us otherwise. At one point there were bands dropping F-bombs on albums just to get that sticker. Because it increased their sales and visibility.

          The Streisand Effect is real, in big ways and also in these small ones. I’m not saying don’t try, but I’m telling you it won’t ever work the way you think it will.

          What’s interesting is that the MPAA Rating system itself was a compromise from the industry with the government to avoid the government stepping in to control content. That’s where it started. Seems eerily similar no? It’s not coincidence. But that’s just another example of the point I’m making too: originally they rated porn movies “X” and agreed these wouldn’t be in the industry- controlled theaters. Porn movie producers took it as a badge and began labeling their movies “XXX” and leaned into it so hard, the MPAA had to change the distinction to something more innocuous, “NC-17.” But the cats out of the bag, even today every 11 year old kid knows what XXX means. The warning became a siren call.

          Warnings are just the Streisand Effect, so don’t expect much of them.

      • sudo@lemmy.fmhy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        The entire premise of NSFW is silly to me. Like no one has an obligation to make sure YOU are safely browsing at work. Get back to work.

        I think you’re taking the W in NSFW too literally. It’s a user-moderated content filtering system. Be it at work, school, on a bus, in the streets, many people wish to be considerate of others and don’t want to publicly flaunt questionable material.

        It may be to protect others from having to view it or to protect themselves from repercussion viewing explicit content in professional environments.

        There’s also a difference between some text with ‘bad words’ and having hardcore porn or beheadings (NSFL) or whatever. Is there a grey area? Of course, different people will consider different things appropriate, especially in different settings and different cultures, but giving users the ability to flag content they post as ‘potentially questionable’ (synonymous to NSFW from my perspective) is just a means to respect other users.