Facebook Temporarily Bans User For Spoof Of Classic Coppertone Ad Showing Daughter’s Bare Bottom


JillWhiteCoppertoneSpoof650Facebook found itself in the middle of another “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” situation involving content posted to the social network, this time over a photo of a young girl’s bare backside that was posted to the Coppertone page to mimic the classic 1953 ad from the sunscreen company of a young girl’s bathing suit being pulled down by a small dog.

The 1953 Coppertone ad appears below, from Coppertone’s Instagram account.


WBTV reported that photographer Jill White of Hickory, N.C., posted a picture of her two-year-old daughter and her friend on the beach, re-creating the classic ad, to the Coppertone page, but a Facebook user reported the photo, and she received a message from the social network giving her the options of deleting the photos, changing its privacy settings, or ignoring the report. White told WBTV:

Well, I ignored it. No way did I think it would fit the criteria of nudity or pornography, and if you read the terms of use in settings, nowhere does it state that this would be considered either.

White was banned from Facebook for 24 hours, including from posting on her photography company’s page, and she then reposted an edited version of the photo, pictured above, telling WBTV:

I got back on with another photo, this time a big emoji face on the area of the butt crack. Now it is being reviewed again for nudity and pornography.

I despise pornography and anything to do with it. I would never ever post a pornographic photo. I am anti-porn.

Facebook contacted WBTV to quell rumors that White was facing a lifetime ban from the social network, saying that this was not the case, and that the original photo was not deleted because it was considered pornographic, but because it displayed a child’s nude bottom.

A Facebook spokesperson told WBTV:

It is hard. With over 1 billion people using Facebook, we have to put in place a set of universal guidelines that respect the views of a wide range of people.

These policies are designed to ensure that Facebook remains a safe, secure, and trusted environment for everyone on Facebook.

(There is a) strict policy against the sharing of pornographic content and any explicitly sexual content where a minor is involved. We also impose limitations on the display of nudity. We aspire to respect people’s right to share content of personal importance.

The edited photo was reported, but it has not been removed, and a Facebook official told WBTV there must be multiple instances of reported and deleted content before any accounts are permanently disabled.

Facebook has found itself in similar situations recently, over content such as breast-feeding photos and a controversial post by fitness competitor and “hot mom” of three Maria Kang.

Readers: How should Facebook have handled this situation?