The paper faced the backlash publications tend to face when they use sexually suggestive images of child-like, albeit legal-aged, women to sell their stories. And, as I mentioned, it apologized. So what’s the big deal?

I’m no prude. But I am concerned about the use of women who look like children being used in a sexual manner, because I hold the uncontroversial position that pedophilia is a bad thing. Children should never be ‘hot.’

So I did what any college-aged guy with a chip on his shoulder might do: I created a Facebook group, “I Hate The Maine Edge,” and invited some sympathetic friends. It got up to about 46 members when I received the following message from Facebook:

“The group ‘I Hate The Maine Edge’ has been removed because it violated our Terms of Use. Among other things, groups that are hateful, threatening, or obscene are not allowed. We also take down groups that attack an individual or group, or advertise a product or service. Continued misuse of Facebook’s features could result in your account being disabled.”

This is where I got annoyed.

Facebook is not merely a site for posting pics of drunken escapades. It is quickly becoming a powerful collection of personal information: It has access to your spending habits, personal interests, work and educational histories, who you are friends with, who you date and what kind of products you buy.

Stupidly, we give this information away based on the assumption that Facebook has made an unspoken promise to its usersT The idea is that we give up that data in exchange for our ability to communicate with friends, to share experiences and information. Facebook gets that data too; but for most of us it’s worth it because, who cares? We don’t have any information to hide.

The problem emerges when Facebook begins to censor our information about negative experiences. Complaining about a local newspaper that contributed to the sexualization of children in our culture is not ‘hateful.’ It’s a way to question the logic and values of our media landscape.

The World Wide Web is a place where people finally get to talk back to the media and to each other: to ask questions, criticize, probe and improve. When one of the largest, most powerful sites on the Web blocks our ability to ask questions and share grievances, it is taking away one of the inherent promises of the Web: Freedom of Speech.

Now, Freedom of Speech is only a legal right when it comes to what the government can and cannot do. But we have a choice over whether or not to make use of corporations and entities that embrace freedom of speech. It is more important when it concerns a corporation actively archiving our entire personal history. I want some assurances that they’re going to act in a straightforward, trustworthy manner and not bend to someone’s complaint about my opinions when I complain about the corporate environment.

I’ll give Facebook all of my personal data, but I want it to preserve my right to complain about stuff. Take that away, and I’m left with a site that only allows me to speak positively about corporate products while it takes careful notes about all of my daily actions and threatens to separate me from my friends and family if I question any larger, more powerful forms of media.

If it seems like Big Brother, you’re as crazy as I am. But there’s a great big box on top of my news feed, warning me that I messed with the wrong guys. So be careful: If you mess with Facebook, you don’t just lose access to a Web site, but to pieces of your personal history and connections to your friends and family. It is too much power for a site to have.

—

Eryk Salvaggio left the group “Facbook fans.”