Banned MySpace links from my site

[Ron]

Well, I've had it with MySpace.

I just signed up there last month. When you sign up, you are given your first friend, Tom, who apparently was the inventor/founder/whatever. Your profile page is pretty blank, so the picture of Tom in your friends area is a pretty obvious place to click.

So I clicked on it, and I'm looking around on his page and some music starts to play. The music is called "Jane Fonda" by "Mickey Avalon". It has adult lyrics in it. WHAT? Don't tons of pre-teens and young teens use this place? How can they put explicit lyrics in the music on what is essentially the welcome page to their community?

I left a polite comment on his profile, but it was never approved.

So I wrote to their customer support. 17 days later they respond by email "Can you send us a link to the objectionable material?". HUH? I told them exactly where it was. So I reply to their email with full details, with links and even a transcription of the lyrics. The email bounces; it's a non-legit address.

There is no case number, there is no name to contact, it was signed "Thanks, Myspace",

So I take my answer, put it back into the contact form and wait. 7 days later I get a response:

Thank You. Please let me know if you have any further problems.



Myspace

The song is still playing on his profile, of course.

So that's it. If they can't police their boards well enough to prevent the welcome page from their founder from containing explicit lyrics, if they can't respond to complaints of obscenity in less than 7 to 17 days, clearly they aren't trying to police any part of their system, and I won't be a party to it.

Fortunately for me, my community isn't very interested in MySpace. I ask you to join with me in not allowing links to MySpace if possibly you can do it.

[Ron]

PS The music isn't terrible, I kinda like it. But that's not the point at all. It's about our kids.

[Galen]

OH PUH-LEASE.....

Those "kids" write worse things than you've probably ever thought, man. Get a grip.

[Spathiphyllum]

Boycotting MySpace?

I'm not cool enough to visit the place, much less code for it internally or externally. By default, I'm boycotting the content by doing nothing. Fortunately, I don't need to pursue interest in such exhibitionism because my visitors don't demand it. It is useful to know, however, how they are policing content whether or not I agree with it. It's a display of corporate/business responsibility.

[Vin DSL]

When you lay with dogs, you get fleas, Ronnie!

You don't know this by now?!?!?

[Ron]

OH PUH-LEASE.....

Those "kids" write worse things than you've probably ever thought, man. Get a grip.

Oh PuhLeeeze yourself. I can make construction workers blush, but I know my young nephew hasn't a clue yet -- and it should stay that way. It's irresponsible for a major site owned by a major corporation to encourage such explicit content in a place targeted at such a young crowd.

I bet you're all for removing all decency regulations for over-the-air broadcasting, too.

Boycotting MySpace?

It is useful to know, however, how they are policing content whether or not I agree with it.

(Or NOT policing content)
So DO you agree with it or disagree with it?

When you lay with dogs, you get fleas, Ronnie!

Yet another pedantic reference to my sheepdog site. Yet again, I have no clue what you're attempting to infer, if anything.

[the_ancient]

removing all decency regulations for over-the-air broadcasting, too.

Yes I am Mr. Ron, it is not the governments place to parent your kids, Vchip and other Parental Controls are available for your use, and the age old method of GASP!!!!! watching your damn kids instead of having the Electronic Baby sitter do it for you


On to the MySpace Problem, If you feel your kids are too young to hear it, then your kids are probally too young to be on myspace to begin with. As such the Computer the young child uses should be locked down prevent access to myspace, and a whole lot of other sites.

If you dont want to take the time to add a simple line to the Host file blocking myspace, then you run the risk of your youngest viewing "questionable" material.


However Google, is a FAR bigger offender than MySpace ever will be, you blocking google from your site too, I bet not

[Spathiphyllum]

(Or NOT policing content)
So DO you agree with it or disagree with it?

That's a tough question, actually. I'm not inclined to impose restrictions on such content because it's a moving target of "ethical" behavior requiring judgment of right/wrong. The internet is actually pretty controllable on a personal level and I find that is where it should stay. Certainly, there are exceptions (explicit terrorism, for example) where acute assaults cannot go ignored. However, as far as social controls, an individual has control of his or her node... or the adults should on behalf of those under their care.

I don't care enough about social exhibitionism to forbid participants from mooning or offending each other even via a nebulous concept such as electronic socializing. If MySpace fills that niche, then by default, I'll yield the market to them and let it go. I won't see it and there is a limit to what we will/should impose upon others despite the threat of unintended consequences to remaining blissfully unaware.

My concern with them specifically would be their policy of non-responsiveness. A service and its support should be polite, prompt, and honest. Clearly, they aren't prompt whether as policy or inattentiveness. That's bad business and doesn't bode well for the seriousness of their endeavor. I don't do business with unserious people. Obviously, I would be less inclined to visit their virtual doors knowing their lackadaisical attitudes whether I find the content enticing or not.

I don't begrudge them their business model. My current circumstance doesn't require me to be particularly interested and your observations disincentivize any curiousity I would have to view their services. I would, however, expect users to self-impose their own set of restrictions of who views what, when, and how. Adults should oversee their kids online just as they should elsewhere in life. Hopefully, observations like yours will warn people what MySpace is/does and let them decide for themselves if it is age-appropriate.

[Galen]

As someone who runs a forum with mostly teenaged users and frequents another forum with mostly teenaged users, I'd have to say that you're a little naive, Ron. You've seen my site and you know how profane I am. I've seen 12 year olds type stuff that makes me go "woah!"

I know my young nephew hasn't a clue yet -- and it should stay that way

1. You don't know a thing about what kinda clues your nephew has. He's not going to talk around you the way he would his peers. Most kids are smart enough to put on a show for adults, making out to be the way adults want them to be. It's nowhere close to reality. I and all of my peers were swearing like sailors and talking "dirty" by the 2nd grade. You think any of the adults in my life knew that? Pfft! Do not presume to speak for your nephew. Kids may not know the word "presumptuous" but they are well acquainted with what it means.

2. Why should it stay that way? Because YOU don't approve? Tough.

I bet you're all for removing all decency regulations for over-the-air broadcasting, too.

Absolutely! What is and is not "decent" is subjective. What you consider "indecent" may not even make me bat an eye, or vice versa. It is not your place and most certainly not the federal government's place to decide what is or is not "decent."

For example, I find your prudish attitude to be indecent, while you no doubt find it perfectly acceptable.

[Ron]

Yes I am Mr. Ron, it is not the governments place to parent your kids, Vchip and other Parental Controls are available for your use, and the age old method of GASP!!!!! watching your damn kids instead of having the Electronic Baby sitter do it for you

You know, sometimes You seem so naive. Do you have children of your own?

I bet you think it would be OK for an explicit commercial for sex toys to suddenly appear during a re-run of Barney? How about full frontal nudity and a surprise on-stage copulation during the Superbowl this year! Yeah, just the thing for the 12 year olds to watch.

I saw the Janet Jackson Incident live, and happened to be paying close attention, and wasn't sure what I saw. I thought that whole thing was blown way out of proportion -- but the reason it was -- was because of it's insertion into a family program.

The public airwaves are the public square -- just as I hope that you'd agree that a couple coupling in the middle of Main Street should be prosecuted, so should commercial purveyors of indecent material over the public airwaves.

The Internet, unlike cable television, is unlimited in the number of ways that any protection scheme could be circumvented, so I have very mixed feelings and great uncertainty about what should be done in this arena by government regulation -- if anything. But that doesn't excuse the proprietor of an enterprise geared towards children from not implementing safeguards voluntarily. Which was my whole point to begin with.

[Ron]

Ditto for Galen.

"Community standards", my man. That's what it's all about.

[olokiop]

Oh dear god I can barely contain myself...

What (bad)luck that its 3am and I don't trust myself to write more than 3 words on topic after midnight.

Galen for President!!!

[the_ancient]

Ditto for Galen.

"Community standards", my man. That's what it's all about.

Your starting with that Democracy CRAP again, WE ARE NOT A DEMOCRACY..... nor should we be.

Let me ask you, if the "Community" set a "standard" that you must wear a suit and tie every day out in public would out support such a standard?

If the community set a "standard" that you can only own a Current Year BMW, Benz or Lexus would you support that standard?

We are a REPUBLIC, Individual RIGHTS are to be PROTECTED from "community standards" aka Mob Rule, aka democracy

[the_ancient]

You know, sometimes You seem so naive. Do you have children of your own?

I think any person that brings a child in to this ****ed up world should be arrested for Child Endangerment. People like you are the reason

I bet you think it would be OK for an explicit commercial for sex toys to suddenly appear during a re-run of Barney? How about full frontal nudity and a surprise on-stage copulation during the Superbowl this year! Yeah, just the thing for the 12 year olds to watch.

No I dont think it is OK, However I dont think it is the GOVERNMENTS job to police it. Do you have such Problems on Cable? the FCC has no Authority over Cable TV Systems, yet these types of problems dont happen, why BECAUSE OF MARKET FORCES and CONSUMER BACKLASH if it did. Not because of Governmental Regulations,

Your Logic is the same used by the Gun Grabbers to Kill another one of our rights, they say "if you allowed to Carry a Gun there will be Blood running down the Street"

Both of these arguments are unfounded, baseless and emotional, meant to encourage totalitarian government

I saw the Janet Jackson Incident live, and happened to be paying close attention, and wasn't sure what I saw. I thought that whole thing was blown way out of proportion -- but the reason it was -- was because of it's insertion into a family program.

Have you watched any Commercials during the Super Bowl? Beer, Sex, and more Beer is the Biggest theme, and that is meant for the "family" ........

if you want family programs, watch ABC FAMILY, the super bowl is not a family event

The public airwaves are the public square -- just as I hope that you'd agree that a couple coupling in the middle of Main Street should be prosecuted, so should commercial purveyors of indecent material over the public airwaves.

I disagree, The "airwaves" are leased, meaning these cease to be "public property" once we as the "public" allow out "government" to lease them for profit to a commercial entity

The Internet, unlike cable television, is unlimited in the number of ways that any protection scheme could be circumvented, so I have very mixed feelings and great uncertainty about what should be done in this arena by government regulation -- if anything. But that doesn't excuse the proprietor of an enterprise geared towards children from not implementing safeguards voluntarily. Which was my whole point to begin with.

And my point is your making a BIG deal over myspace, but Google, who has basically no "safegaurds" in place for GASP!!!!!!! porn......... why are you not banning google..... Because your a Hypocrite that is why

[Galen]

I bet you think it would be OK for an explicit commercial for sex toys to suddenly appear during a re-run of Barney? How about full frontal nudity and a surprise on-stage copulation during the Superbowl this year! Yeah, just the thing for the 12 year olds to watch.

Who here said anything like that? Why do you feel the need to take your argument to such extremes? Is your argument not strong enough? It's like, if I said "lower the driving age" and you came back with "OMFG, do you want 5 year olds driving?!" C'mon, Ron, you're more intelligent than to give such a just-plain-dumb response.

And ditto on what the_ancient said. We live in a society where individuality is supposedly celebrated. Dude, my 11yo swears like a sailor. I don't "encourage that behavior" but why should I stop her? Give me a REASON. Do you even have one besides "it's just wrong man?" She knows how to speak here and she knows how to speak around people who would be bothered by such things. Guess what, she's a good kid, makes good grades, and hasn't yet had her brain melted by some "bad words." What a crappy concept that is in the first place. "Bad words." Pfft, there's no such thing.

Oh yeah, and I'm sure you can guess just where the "community" can shove their "standards." :P