Facebook: Curator of Online Culture?

As the debate on Facebook continues to grow and its ability to own images of work and what-have-you comes up for debate, another topic quickly surfacing is Facebook's ability to decide what's acceptable and what's not when it comes to online communication and/or "culture." Now, I'm not one to condone posting pictures of sexually loaded imagery on Facebook (...or am I?), but one thing certainly raises an eyebrow: who gets to decide what is and isn't art? And should we be able to post it online?

Well, to me this seems like an obvious answer. Personally, as a creator of nude art and especially the kind that includes the goods, I'm constantly second-guessing what I can post when it comes to Facebook, blogs, or any social media for that matter. It is my right as an artist to be able to show and discuss my work and what better way to do so than with say, Blogger or Facebook (please view previous post)? So, I choose not to put up the 18 or older warning on my blog. As a victim of censorship and a proponent of art education (even to youngsters), I choose not to censor my own work. Because it's not porn. It's art. And I believe everyone should have access to it.

However, Facebook doesn't seem to feel that way.

And the New York Academy of the Arts sets an example of what happens when Facebook decides your artwork isn't art (or at least worthy of being seen). So, this doesn't happen to everyone, but it happens to some. Which is even more questionable, if you ask me.

New York Academy of Art uploads artwork from professors and students to the college's Facebook page. The images removed include painting, drawing, and other mediums alike. Nonetheless, the school countered Facebook's actions by writing about it on their blog. According to the Academy, “As an institution of higher learning with a long tradition of upholding the art world’s ‘traditional values and skills,’ we, the Graduate School of Figurative Art, find it difficult to allow Facebook to be the final arbiter — and online curator — of the artwork we share with the world.” The college claims images of artworks have been continuously deleted from their page, leading up to a suspension of the account entirely.

So, what does Facebook have to say in response to all of this?

According to a New York Times article, Facebook claims they made a mistake. The article goes on to say that Facebook representatives affirm that "while the company bans nude photographs, the company has an unwritten policy that allows drawings or sculptures of nudes." According to Facebook spokesman, Simon Axten, "We count many amateur — and some professional — artists among our employees, and we’re thrilled that so many artists share their work on Facebook. In this case, we congratulate the artist on his lifelike portrayal that, frankly, fooled our reviewers."

Mistake? It happens all the time. The above images are pretty clearly not photographs. Needless to say, it doesn't leave much hope for the fine art photographers approaching the nude body (especially not of gentlemen). I don't feel that my personal work is sexually suggestive whatsoever and in fact, a wise man once said (I'm looking at you, Forest McMullin) that my work appears to be rather anti-sexual. However, I will personally attest to my experience with Blogger which has so far not pulled down things posted by myself or others (at least to my knowledge) and hasn't contacted me thusfar to display a warning message.

And so, the future of Facebook is still yet to be determined. Hopefully, they will realize their importance as a social media site and get their hands out of curating art. And by curating, I mean censoring.

Above drawing by Steven Assael. Above painting by Richard T. Scott.

Thanks to Claire Moynihan for forwarding the NY Times article on this. Oh, and she has a really cool blog you should check out: The Art Offensive