Sign in. It’s quick, free and it’s up to you.
An account is an optional way to support the work we do. Find out more.
FACEBOOK HAS REVERSED its ban on the publication of the cover art of Led Zeppelin’s Houses of the Holy album due to its “cultural significance”.
The artwork features images of nude children, something the social media giant said was against its community standards.
However, it has today announced that the image is of cultural significance and was therefore reversing the ban.
A spokesperson said: “As our community standards explain, we don’t allow nude images of children on Facebook. But we know this a culturally significant image. Therefore, we’re restoring the posts we removed.
“We do not allow content that sexually exploits or endangers children. When we become aware of apparent child exploitation, we report it to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC), in compliance with applicable law.
“We know that sometimes people share nude images of their own children with good intentions; however, we generally remove these images because of the potential for abuse by others and to help avoid the possibility of other people reusing or misappropriating the images.”
Houses of the Holy was released in 1973. It was the band’s fifth studio album. It sold over 10 million copies worldwide.
To embed this post, copy the code below on your site
I’m offended. There, I said it. Now world, change to suit me.
@Dr Richard DeWitt: the world is on the brink of a recession however Ireland is somehow ‘booming’. Don’t believe the newspapers and the journal. We are not exempt from a recession
All the rubbish that’s on Facebook and they banned this.
Christ that “note to the Journal editors” is the most eye-roll inducing crock of shite I’ve ever seen, and that’s some standard to achieve considering the drivel that came before it!
@Dr Richard DeWitt: unbelievable pile of nonsense but well done your sense of entitlement is amusing
@Dr Richard DeWitt: but, your comment is not reporting the news. It is your comment only. It is an inherently biased and subjective opinion that this platform is not obliged to share and, hence, support by hosting it. The OPO will simply issue you a reply refuting your complaint.
@Dr Richard DeWitt: Did you ever try climbing down out of your own arse?
@Dr Richard DeWitt: funny how you don’t have any concerns about American pro life groups spending 100s of thousands of euros running pro life adverts targeted at Irish voters.
This was interference with out democratic process and this is exactly why the adverts were banned. Amazing you ignored these facts.
Pro choice groups welcomed the an because they were not using such underhanded, interfering and undemocratic tactics.
As for your note to the editor.. There isn’t enough eye rolls in the world for you and such nonsense.
@Barry Somers: His main argument is Irish people were to stupid to know what they were voting for because Facebook didn’t advertise his point of view. It’s an unbelievable level of arrogance.
So happy the losers lost.
@Dr Richard DeWitt:
I like lamp , LOUD NOISES!!
(Note to “The Journal” editors: I respectfully request that “The Journal” desist from removing comments such as this, which merely do not accord with the editorial line of “The Journal”. This comment is neither defamatory, offensive, nor off-topic. If this comment is removed, please be advised that I will be getting in direct contact with the Office of the Press Ombudsman to make a claim of impartiality of news reporting. This claim will be founded on the well-established anecdotal basis that the readership here takes high note of the comments, and “The Journal’s” selective removal of certain comments which are against their institutional political bias unfairly influences how news is consumed on this website, and hence constitutes a breach of Principles 1 & 2 of the Code of Practice for Newspapers and Periodicals. Kindly note also that a screenshot of this posting and its context have been made. Thank you.)
@Dermot McKenna: The other comment similar to yours but in relation to the abortion referendum was removed. What happens now?
@Dermot McKenna: Don’t get it???
@Manbackonboard: oh full on nuclear keyboard war!
The sarcasm will glass the planet surface
Hope they don’t ban Spinal Tap’s Sniff The Glove.
@Shelly Levine: Love your profile photo… One of the nice guys!
“album cover” not “cover album”. Does anyone ever proofread this rag?
Regarding TheJournal heading: Houses of the Holy is not a covers album. If my understanding is correct, what was banned was the album cover, not the cover album.
Why is it culturally significant? I know I could probably Google it but I couldn’t be bothered.
@Manbackonboard: because it looks like the giants causeway and they’re fcekin class!
@Manbackonboard: I reckon it’s more about the album being culturally significant than the cover art if I’m honest.
Blind Faiths album cover is a bit ropey, but not this one in my opinion.
@Alan Biddulph: i was one that was banned. I once shared a studio with the artist who created this cover and was talking about him on Facebook, Phil Crennell, contracted by Hipgnosis. The children are climbing up to Dunluce Castle in Antrim.
@WoodlandBard: Not the Giants Causeway??
@Paul Corcoran: Yes, it’s The Giants Causeway, the inner sleeve photograph was taken at Dunluce Castle which is nearby.
As if any further reminder were needed to delete Facebook.
I’m not sure why depictions of nude children are used? I’m no prude but children are sacred and I’m sure they could have used something else.
@Wild Goose: They are Robert Plants children…
@Jason Kilroy: No they’re not.
@Jason Kilroy: They’re not Robert Plant’s children.
@Jason Kilroy: No they’re not.
Not as good as Smell the glove by spinal tap, it’s my favourite album cover ever.
It’s an album cover…. Not a cover album
I wouldn’t reverse such a decision, any image of nude children should not be on a cover of any album? Yes I know I would seem prudish to many…but”Culturally Significant”…my behind it is? Rubbish Cover for such a famous group?
Not my idea of a Famous Group…but still,Famous to many!
What’s the NCMEC? I haven’t heard of it. Is it a nation body under the Dept. Of Health?
Never agreed with the need to use any child image, especially nude…even if it’s considered”Culturally Significant”… my behind it is? ;)
Facebook is a joke.
It would be more interesting to see what would happen if Facebook or google had to pay a share or their profits from selling our data back to us.
But yeah led zeppelin covers shouldn’t be banned.
Rubbish, try it and you still get banned for 24 hours, Ffs.
Try it and you still get banned for 24 hours, Ffs.
have your say