HuffPost Social Reading

Reddit Bans Child Pornography Images After Online Outcry

Huffington Post UK    
First Posted: 15/02/2012 14:49 Updated: 15/02/2012 14:49

The social news website and community Reddit has been forced to ban sexually suggestive images of children, after its longstanding policy of not "limiting" what its members did on the site was widely condemned.

Users had been openly posting sexualised images of children on forums including those named "JailbaitVideos" and "PreTeen_girls".

Now the forums have been banned - but some users of the site are angry, claiming it may be the start of a "slippery slope" leading towards greater censorship online.

And even after the ban Reddit has come under further criticism for continuing to host forums dedicated to pictures of dead children.

Reddit, which is based in the United States, allows millions of users to share links, images, video and news stories on an almost endless variety of topics.

The site was bought in 2006 by Conde Nast before being spun off as a subsidiary of the magazine publisher's parent company Advance Publications.

While much of the content shared on the site is the usual blend of tech news, world politics, Internet memes and viral videos familiar to the rest of the web, albeit traditionally with a higher level of depth than some competitors, other areas of its site frequently cross boundaries that even the site's operators find uncomfortable.

But beyond a few basic rules, which include "no spamming, no cheating, no personal info, nothing illegal, and no interfering the site's functions," it's pretty much anything goes.

The result is an anarchic system of sub-groups ('sub-Reddits') on almost any topic - including many that appeared to outside observers - and many users of the site itself - as highly controversial and offensive, at the very least.

Several of the groups were explicitly dedicated to posting sexually suggestive images of underage boys and girls ('jailbait').

Other groups were apparently created to share links to images of dead children, torture and abuse.

Among the groups were those named:

  • /r/TeenGirls
  • /r/preteen_girls
  • /r/JailbaitVideos
  • /r/niggerjailbait
  • /r/JailbaitJunkies
  • /r/malejailbait
  • /r/assbait
  • /r/preteen_boys

Various media outlets, including CNN, have made attempts to "expose" the site's darker side, but Reddit has always resisted the full implications of the criticism.

Even when Gawker exposed two members apparently trading pornography featuring a 14-year-old girl, the site did not change its general policy even though it did shut down the specific sub-Reddit in question.

Reddit general manager Erik Martin said in response to the CNN report:

"We’re a free speech site and the cost of that is there’s offensive stuff on there."

He added:

"Once we start taking down some things we find offensive, then we’re no longer a free speech site and no longer a platform for everyone. We’re exerting editorial control and that’s not what we are."

Its users appeared to agree. The "Jailbait" section exposed by Cooper won the "best of Reddit" poll in 2008 by a margin of 2-to-1.

But now, after users on another online community, Something Awful, gathered together to post a much longer list of the offensive groups, Reddit has been forced to act.

In a blog post titled "A necessary change in policy", the site said:

"Child pornography is a toxic and unique case for Internet communities, and we're protecting reddit's ability to operate by removing this threat. We remain committed to protecting reddit as an open platform."

In the post Reddit emphasised that it had always acted against anyone posting explicit "child pornography", but that a "grey area" had been exposed around sexually suggestive material featuring minors that it could no longer tolerate.

"We have changed our policy because interpreting the vague and debated legal guidelines on a case by case basis has become a massive distraction and risks reddit being pulled in to legal quagmire."

"As of today, we have banned all subreddits that focus on sexualization of children."

Some users of Reddit attempted to defend the right to post the suggestive images.

One said:

"Apparently free speech doesn't matter as much to these people as not getting creeped out does."

Others decried the policy as one made by "thought police":

"This crack down is inherently wrong," one user said. "Its not the pictures that are sexual its the perception of the individuals viewing them. Basically what reddit has done is take down legal pictures because of the way people interpret them. Its literally thought policing."

Despite the move, Reddit maintains it is "adamant about not limiting the ability to use the reddit platform even when we do not ourselves agree with or condone a specific use".

Groups still viewable on Reddit as of press time but not viewed by the Huffington Post, according to the blog Extreme Tech, include those dedicated to pictures of dead children and pictures of domestic abuse against women.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST UK TECH

The social news website and community Reddit has been forced to ban sexually suggestive images of children, after its longstanding policy of not "limiting" what its members did on the site was widely ...
The social news website and community Reddit has been forced to ban sexually suggestive images of children, after its longstanding policy of not "limiting" what its members did on the site was widely ...
The social news website and community Reddit has been forced to ban sexually suggestive images of children, after its longstanding policy of not "limiting" what its members did on the site was widely ...
The social news website and community Reddit has been forced to ban sexually suggestive images of children, after its longstanding policy of not "limiting" what its members did on the site was widely ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 52
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
00:09 on 17/02/2012
Why is this even an issue? Why the Hell is banning suggestive pictures of underage girls a crime against free speech? People these days think anything that comes out of their mouths or put on the Internet is protected by free speech. Reddit users who were "outraged" by this need to screw their head on straight. I'm all for free speech, but child pornography is NOT free speech--it's a crime itself and nothing in the world is going to ever allow it to be anything but. Forget the free speech and "oppression" and start thinking about the little girls who are being exploited. Get your priorities straight!
20:15 on 17/02/2012
"Why the Hell is banning suggestive pictures of underage girls a crime against free speech?"

Simply put, suggestive pictures are not illegal. Make them illegal through legislature, and this would no longer qualify under the protections of free speech.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
photo
MNKen
Eschew Obfuscation
12:49 on 16/02/2012
"Its not the pictures that are sexual its the perception of the individuals viewing them."

Like saying if you have sex with a 13 year old girl and she consented, that is ok. It is the perception of others that is wrong.
12:14 on 16/02/2012
Unless you are a police officer investigating a specific case the only reason someone would view pictures of dead children or naked children is for nefarious purposes. There is a big difference between something that is offensive and something that is abusive or inappropriate, although, it is possible to be both offensive and inappropriate.
11:21 on 16/02/2012
Child pornography, being illegal and awful, has always been banned.

The users and moderators of reddit were just fed up with having to play whack-a-mole regarding the banning of subreddits that hosted sexualized images of children. They would take one down and within hours someone would just host another subreddit in the same vein with another name that no-one knew about.

The blanket ban is just about making it easier to get rid of the creeps without having a huge 1st amendment argument whenever users report a new subreddit hosting pics of children. This frees reddit users to continue using and associating with reddit without fear of being linked to illegal and immoral materials, so reddit can continue to (mostly) be a home for free discussion, charitable works, and funny pictures of cats.
10:58 on 16/02/2012
We should never base laws on principle. When the safety of children is at risk, then we must say enough is enough, we can't say "well the principle of freedom of speech is more important than safety." Too many people now try too hard to be too liberal, we must be pragmatic about issues not base everything on our principles.
12:16 on 16/02/2012
KindOfBaloo,
Agreed. Well put.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
13:13 on 16/02/2012
Sacrificing liberty for safety is a slippery slope. Too often we hand the reigns over to tyrants who claim to be looking out for your safety, and it rarely ever turns out well.
13:28 on 16/02/2012
You'd be fine then if a daughter or son of yours was raped for the sexual gratification of peadophiles then Brian? After all, you wouldn't want to reestrict their liberty would you?
10:20 on 16/02/2012
wow i guess we can kiss the first amerndment goodbye in this country
photo
CubfanBudman
He Ain't Heavy, He's my Brother
10:21 on 16/02/2012
It has always had limits in extreme cases.

It is illegal to yell fire in a crowded theater.
photo
MNKen
Eschew Obfuscation
12:44 on 16/02/2012
You think child porn should be protected under the 1st amendment? Some prosecutors would like to see what you have on your computer.
This comment has been removed.
This comment has been removed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Majestry
00:18 on 16/02/2012
"jailbait" basically is teenage girls in bikinis. Aka, some of the millions of pictures floating around on facebook.
photo
CubfanBudman
He Ain't Heavy, He's my Brother
10:02 on 16/02/2012
or going to the beach.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
dbrett480
00:16 on 16/02/2012
Don't most people get their child pornography from 4chan?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
11:38 on 16/02/2012
That is the kind of thing where you should say " A friend told me..."
23:36 on 15/02/2012
Censorship is a terrible thing so in the name of freedom of information I would publish the names and addresses of all the people who post pedophile porn on the net.
athiesttoo
reorganization: creating an illusion of progress
13:42 on 16/02/2012
Gret idea!
21:52 on 15/02/2012
It was always been banned. The Huffington Post always has misleading titles..
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
flyinghigh0905
19:00 on 15/02/2012
"But beyond a few basic rules, which include "no spamming, no cheating, no personal info, nothing illegal, and no interfering the site's functions," it's pretty much anything goes."

Child porn IS illegal in America.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Andrew Cole
20:18 on 15/02/2012
You didn't read the rest of the article, did you?

"In the post Reddit emphasised that it had always acted against anyone posting explicit "child pornography", but that a "grey area" had been exposed around sexually suggestive material featuring minors that it could no longer tolerate."

Basically the group shared legal, but pushing up against the limit, photos of children in suggestive outfits or poses or whatever. The pedophiles simply filled in the blanks with their imaginations. Because the photos were on the border, Reddit doesn't want to open itself up to endless legal battles, even if they always come out the winner.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
flyinghigh0905
21:06 on 15/02/2012
No, I didn't read the whole article. Thanks for the further information.
23:58 on 15/02/2012
"The pedophiles simply filled in the blanks with their imaginatio­ns."

By the logic presented, any picture featuring a child qualifies. Furthermore, this establishes a dangerous precedent in that it allows censorship based on an extremely subjective set of criteria. The same rational is currently in place in Australia to prevent models with A-Cup breasts from participating in pornography.

In short, it's thought policing.
20:40 on 15/02/2012
Their argument is since the kids are fully clothed, it's legal.
An argument that would hold more water if the posters there weren't cretins and pedophiles who were openly leering at 8 year olds in bikinis.
20:17 on 17/02/2012
"Their argument is since the kids are fully clothed, it's legal."

That's not an argument, it's fact. One cannot be imprisoned for having fully clothed pictures of people, regardless of age.
18:37 on 15/02/2012
It has ALWAYS been banned. They just banned the forums that discussed child porn in a positive light. These were obviously the forums that had more incidents. Reddit has ALWAYS responded to reports of child porn with swift action and cooperation with the authorities.
16:17 on 16/02/2012
Like the conversation between violentacrez and hueypriest? "Sorry bud, looks like we're gonna have to..."