Blogless

Since they were acquired by Yahoo, Flickr has implemented a censorship scheme that is so poorly thought out, it’s offensive.

If you use Flickr, you are obligated to tag anything in your photostream which might be offensive. Later (at night, while you are sleeping, no doubt– like the tooth fairy, but with uncompromising moral fiber), someone at Flickr will look at your account and verify that you have correctly tagged your offensive images. If you do not do this, or Flickr disagrees with your self-policing, your account is labeled as ‘unsafe’. Oh, and anyone else can decide to come along later and tag your images as offensive, too. Presumably, this could render you ‘unsafe’, as well.

I give them credit for making the whole scheme usable on their site, but the underlying logic is flawed. I would need a chart to graph the *numerous* ways this could potentially get under people’s skin. Indeed, this is a no-win for Flickr.

Normal Person + Anonymity + Audience = …

In short, the ‘unsafe’ label is digital McCarthyism. You are expected to tell on yourself; the company is watching to make sure you do; if your neighbor tells on you, you tell on your neighbor. As a result of their new policy, Flickr not only has to expend a lot of time and energy policing images, but they also have to settle disputes about abuse and mislabeling.

Folksonomies are like markets: built from self-interest and choice. Flickr doesn’t seem to understand this. Now, you are compelled to tag your images, not to help yourself, but because Flickr has made it your job. Congratulations, you’re at work!

Moreover, everyone’s standard of decency is different—how could this arrangement possibly work? It’s just inviting acrimony into the community. If you own a website and you must censor, I recommend doing so monolithically. Blame China. Never trust your community standards to an anonymous social network. Flickr needs to read some John Gabriel.

Worst of all is that this arrangement isn’t even necessary. I will get to that in a bit.

My Yahoo Profile Says I’m 129 Years Old

The ‘unsafe’ label itself is a bad idea for so many reasons. First of all, Flickr is rendering a negative judgment upon the user. Never a good idea. Why is there a need to get personal? They’re just asking for trouble. Tag the photos, not the user.

Why is the label a big deal? When you share your graduation photos with your grandma, try explaining to her why your account is ‘unsafe’. To get rid of the label, how many photos do you have to fix? What did people find offensive? How are you ever going to remove the taint? Unclean!

In practice, it isn’t even good censorship, just Yahoo covering their backsides. So people have to show proof of age to see your photos, like that’s going to stop anybody. Everybody knows the information on profiles is garbage. They’ve protected no one. All they’ve done with the censor-tag is show kids where the good stuff is kept.

As far as I’m concerned, the only self-censorship a user should have to perform is deciding whether or not to upload something. It’s the only thing that works. It’s the only thing that is fair to everyone. Once something is on the web – even if it’s filtered, tagged, locked away, or whatever—nobody can claim to have control over it. Flickr should know better than to promise as much.

I’m sorry, but if you haven’t figured this out yet, let me lay it down for you: If you surf the internet, you must resign yourself to the fact that you are going to see some f*@!ed up s#!!. Daily.

Tag it. Tag it Good.

Worse, Flickr already has a working solution, they just don’t know it (or they really want me to make my chart). They should ask for more descriptions in tags, not judgments. Properly implemented, this is a better way to filter questionable content. Flickr doesn’t need a ‘censor this’ tag. They should use the ones they’ve already got. Do you find [body part n] offensive? Okay, no [body part n] pics for you. What about “kittens”? Okay, let’s look at some kittens.

Flickr does not need to take it upon themselves (or ask their users) to be the moral authority. What they need to do is allow users to filter what they see based on neutral content tags, while encouraging the community to add descriptive tags and ensure their accuracy. The quality of the database (and thus, filtering) would improve and it would prevent things from getting personal. It’s not a perfect solution, certainly. But if Flickr wants to keep things transparent with its community, it’s as close to a win-win as it gets in this touchy area.