Note: The thread title is directly quoted from the title of cited article
First allow me to provide a little background to this story.
Yahoo Nukes Man's Photos Over Obama Comments
Flickr user Shepherd Johnson was browsing the official White House photostream one night when he decided to post a politically-charged comment.
Then another, then another. Soon, without warning, Yahoo's photo-sharing service deleted his account, complete with 1,200 pictures.
An unrepentant Yahoo won't say what, exactly, Johnson did wrong. His comments were about Barack Obama's support of a bill allowing the government to
suppress torture photos. They were attached to seemingly relevant images from the president's recent trip to Cairo to ring in a new era of
U.S.-Middle Eastern relations.Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
The bill Mr. Johnson was referring to is:
Obama's support for the new Graham-Lieberman secrecy law
The White House is actively supporting a new bill jointly sponsored by Sens. Lindsey Graham and Joe Lieberman -- called The Detainee
Photographic Records Protection Act of 2009 -- that literally has no purpose other than to allow the government to suppress any "photograph taken
between September 11, 2001 and January 22, 2009 relating to the treatment of individuals engaged, captured, or detained after September 11, 2001, by
the Armed Forces of the United States in operations outside of the United States." As long as the Defense Secretary certifies -- with no review
possible -- that disclosure would "endanger" American citizens or our troops, then the photographs can be suppressed even if FOIA requires
disclosure. The certification lasts 3 years and can be renewed indefinitely. The Senate passed the bill as an amendment last week.Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
Let that sink in for a second ... we will come back to it later.
Flickr's public response in this matter is as follows:
In accordance with Flickr's policy, we cannot disclose information to third parties concerning a member's account. However, in joining Flickr,
all of our members agree to abide by our Community Guidelines. These guidelines require that all of our members be respectful of the community and
flag content that may not be suitable for "safe" viewing. Our members have always done a great job of identifying inappropriate and offensive
content on Flickr and bringing it to our attention. We encourage all members to continue to make Flickr a safe place to share photos and videos.
Flickr is a very large community made up of many types of members from all over the world, and we respect the viewpoints and expressions of all of our
members. In crafting the Community Guidelines, Flickr weighed the rights of the individual vs. the rights of the overall community, and built a system
that would enable members to choose what they want to view. As with any community, online or off, there are members who may disregard the Community
Guidelines. When this happens, Flickr may have to take action accordingly towards building a respectful community.
*Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
But the story doesn't end there ...
Johnson, obviously distraught at the flagrant censorship communicated with Flickr's (owned by Yahoo) customer service and was offered placation via a
$25 gift card.
That's when he decider to contact Flickr's founder Stuart Butterfield.
Here's their communication:
Flickr Founder Calls Nuked User 'A Dick'
Oh dear ...
Now I know what some of you are going to say. Flickr/Yahoo is a private company and they should be allowed to control their content. Except that
Flickr has yet to tell M.r. Johnson what specific aspect of their terms and condition he has breached.
Johnson, who lives outside Richmond, still has no answers. More crucially, he also doesn't have access to any of the 1,200 pictures he uploaded
to Flickr under his paid "Pro" membership.Please visit the link provided for the complete story.
They're even contending that they "lost" his images even though they were stored in his premium account.
This is as blatant as censorship gets folks, and to make matters worse, as stated above, there is a bill considered to make all this nice and neat.
Consider the implications ...
Consider them good.
Also I urge you to take the time to read the following important related article:
Flickr: Setting limits for online speech
The information in this post and related links provided via cryptome.org
[edit on 15 Jun 2009 by schrodingers dog]