back to article Facebook restricts ads running next to dodgy posts

Facebook has begun preventing ads from running alongside controversial material - such as sexual, graphic or violent content - posted by users of the social network. The free content ad network confirmed on Friday that it would begin protecting brands that advertise on Facebook from being displayed on pages and groups carrying …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. wowfood

    So wait

    if I put sexually explicit material on my facebook page I won't have to put up with ads?

    *starts taking sexy pictures of self*

    1. dogged

      Re: So wait

      Facebook - soon to be home of the Phallus-Avatar.

      1. Anonymous Coward 15

        It's like Chatroulette

        But with even more dicks.

      2. Simon Harris Silver badge
        Coat

        Re: So wait

        So we have a choice..

        pages with 'nads, or pages with ads.

        1. Anonymous Custard Silver badge

          Re: So wait

          And does it work the other way around?

          Can we object to dodgy ads being placed beside regular facebook updates too?

    2. g e
      Go

      DDOS their revenue

      Maybe.. just maybe

      e.g. pornhub.com/contactus (I bet it doesn't even have to be a valid url, either, esp when "automated")

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    so ....

    So if i were to put some naughty words in white on white on the page, will this disable the ads ?

    Perhaps an image with a misleading file name.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Maybe

      Just a funny hometown name:

      Six Mile Bottom

      Bottisham

      Penis

      Twatt

      1. Code Monkey

        Re: Maybe

        I don't do Facebook but if I did, I'd have Shyte Brook as my hometown.

        http://maps.geotastic.org/vaguely-rude-places/index.php?id=153

        1. Simon Harris Silver badge
          Unhappy

          Re: Maybe

          I seem to remember a while ago Facebook refused to let the inhabitants of Effin in Ireland say where they were from!

  3. Efros

    or alternatively ABP, never see ads on FB again. Ironic, actually not more like totally predictable, that the advertisers can decide where their ads appear and the users can't decide where the advertisers ads appear

  4. Titus Technophobe
    Go

    Brand Tarnish

    It comes after a number of high-profile companies yanked their ads from the Mark Zuckerberg-run network over concerns that their brand was tarnished by the material it ran parallel to.

    To my thinking the appearance of an 'ad' any which where on Facebook tarnishes that brand.

  5. Richard Wharram

    Um, what content?

    Facebook bans filth anyway doesn't it?

    Am I naive?

    1. auburnman
      Trollface

      Re: Um, what content?

      Well then you've always got the controversial opinion fallback. Just end every post with a signiature like

      "Hitler had some good ideas."

  6. Gordon Pryra

    It makes these pages sound like they have lost out.

    " Page selling adult products was eligible to have ads appear on its right-hand side"

    I would rather not be eligible

    After all, being eligible just gives my time-line a sting of adverts for games consisting of cartoon girls with their tits out.

  7. Crisp Silver badge

    Facebook is providing a meeting place for paedophiles

    Wait.... What?

    Does Labour MP Helen Goodman have any evidence of this? (Besides people posting pictures of their kids?)

    1. h3

      Re: Facebook is providing a meeting place for paedophiles

      It is obvious it is. Graph Search is just what they need.

      Now all we need is Facebook to be added to the IWF blacklist and the world could just become that little bit more pleasant to be in.

    2. Irongut

      Re: Facebook is providing a meeting place for paedophiles

      If she does have any evidence then she should be informing the IWF and relevant police organisations. Since she told Parliament (and presumably the Daily Wail) then clearly she has no evidence but didn't want to let that get in the way of her outrage.

      And now I need to go clean myself after defending Facebook. Ugh.

    3. P. Lee Silver badge
      Mushroom

      Re: Facebook is providing a meeting place for paedophiles

      And how does it compare with the Dragon track I hear on the radio, "are you old enough for love?"

      Put it to music and its all ok?

  8. The Nameless Mist
    Unhappy

    if only the reverse were true

    Why should I as a private FB user, have to put up with a continual spam of "Date this female" adverts?

    I bat for the other team, but FB seem convinced I like seeing this crud on my page.

    Of course even choosing the ads configuration / don't like because, and using every option from NOT INTERESTED to SEXUALLY EXPLICIT doesn't stop them. The same ads keep coming back.

    Maybe FB should get off its hobby horse and give the end users what they want, direct control over the adverts they want (or don't want) up to NONE AT ALL .. of course that means the hordes of money merchantts paying for ever decreasing value stock in FB won't be happy

    1. Lamont Cranston
      Joke

      Re: if only the reverse were true

      While we're at it, this moon I acquired HAS NO STICK!

      Seriously, though, all the facebook ads that I see are for dating websites, too (despite my profile showing that I am married). Given that I don't bother with "like"-ing much on facebook, it clearly doesn't know much about me, and so the default profile for "man on the internet" must be "can't get a girlfriend".

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: if only the reverse were true

      "Maybe FB should get off its hobby horse and give the end users what they want, direct control over the adverts they want (or don't want) up to NONE AT ALL"

      You are aware that Facebook is a business, right, and that it's not somehow intrinsically evil for a business to want to make money to pay for its operations?

      I mean, do you have the same complaints about, say, ASUS? "How dare they charge me MONEY for their product! It's all just to satisfy their GREEDY KKKORPORATE BACKERS ISN'T IT!! THEY DON'T ACTUALLY LIKE ME FOR ME!" etc etc...

      If you don't like advertising-supported business models, well - first off, you're using one when you're reading El Reg; second, you're not advocating that FB allow an option for a pay model. You're just demanding that they give you the service for free. Facebook's intrinsic value aside - and presumably you believe it has at least some given that you use it - doesn't that strike you as somewhat unreasonable?

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    What about banning inappropriate adverts next to safe content?

    Will Fb ban inappropriate adverts such as credit card and gambling adverts next to content intended for teenagers? Or adverts showing guns promoting killing on police Fb pages?

    Double standards. I realise adverts are allegedly chosen based on the currently logged-in user, but I have never used or been interested in credit cards, gambling or guns, so there must be a random element to the adverts displayed.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: What about banning inappropriate adverts next to safe content?

      I live in a country where the main language is not english but constantly get ads in the local lingo even though my profile states I only speak english, my browser an os are set to english too.

      Just goes to show their big data analytics are total shite and ignore what you tell them.

      GOogle has the same problem too on some of their other services...

  10. David Evans

    So let me get this straight...

    ...Facebook protects brands from dodgy content, but despite claims to the contrary, doesn't protect users from dodgy brands? If I click "I find this ad offensive" on say, a gambling ad, does it stop me getting more gambling ads? Does. It. Bollocks. I know that the users are the "product" on Facebook, but this just really rubs your nose in it.

  11. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "In order to be thorough, this review process will be manual at first"

    Yeah, good luck with that. With God knows how many million users and pages, manual and thorough sound like a massive contradiction. But hey, the longer advertisers keep their ads out of FB, the less money FB gets. It's been massively overrated by investors anyway. About time that reality dawned on them.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019