Login

Facebook explains why they blocked Gris' launch trailer advert

The other day, we heard that Facebook rejected a Gris trailer advert based on the image above. Devolver Digital said the ad was shot down due to sexually suggestive imagery. Today Facebook has commented on the matter to Polygon, and they say the reasoning first discussed was not true.

Facebook said that it was actually a link out from the video to Devolver Digital’s Instagram that caused the trouble. Turns out there's some imagery with nudity on Devolver Digital's Instagram, and Facebook didn't want people clicking out and seeing that. Seems like something Devolver Digital could fix, but we have no word on if they will.

Categories: Consoles
Tags: eshop, switch
Games: Gris

Comments

Top Rated Comment
elfteiroh
Thu Jan 10 19 10:56pm
Rating: 3

I still think it's a stretch. :/
Saying no to the ad for something that is not only not directly related, but on another site is a little bit far fetched. Sad

Okay what about Meat Boy then?

That's a reasonable explanation as far as I can tell. I'm actually surprised we got a response from them this quickly, though I may be mixing up stories and companies. Sounds like it can be easily resolved.

That's absolutely fair enough, some companies don't want to associate themselves with that.

Spoiler

I dunno, that sounds like a hastily-found justification to me.

elfteiroh
Thu Jan 10 19 10:56pm
Rating: 3

I still think it's a stretch. :/
Saying no to the ad for something that is not only not directly related, but on another site is a little bit far fetched. Sad

aurora unit
Fri Jan 11 19 04:58am
(Updated 1 time)

So why did Devolver Digital claim otherwise? I can think of three reasons. A: They knew better but decided to lie for publicity. B: They didn't know better because Facebook blundered on their end of the communication. Or C: They were right but Facebook hastily looked for another explanation that seemed more plausible when the story went public.
I am disinclined to believe in A because Devolver Digital isn't some small new studio and Gris was getting ample of attention already anyway for such a silly stunt, and when I look at their track records, I can see which company's history of blundering and covering up speaks - or rather fills - volumes. From what others said about their experiences with Facebook, the likeliest explanation seems to be B, which would mean Facebook has some fixing to do as well.
Of course, I might be overlooking better explanations or just be wrong. It's merely my opinion, and an uninformed one at that.

Oh no! Potential Nudity! God forbid.

impurekind
Fri Jan 11 19 09:58am
Rating: 1 (Updated 2 times)

That is just as ridiculous imo--quite possibly even more so.

At some point some link for some product is going to potentially lead to another link, and that might lead to another link, and eventually that link might lead to a link where something potentially "sexual" is shown (in this case is was literally just a painted image of a bare *ss an nothing more--God help the children!). That's the Internet for you.

But you shouldn't be banning an ad that in itself is not showing any nudity whatsoever for being "explicit". That's just stupid.

And, as many people have already pointed out, you're apparently totally fine with far more "explicit" stuff being advertised directly on your site--so long as someone's paying you for that privilege.

Search

Today's VIP

warriorspath's avatar
Joined: September 2012
Apprentice

Social Services

Want to join this discussion?

You should like, totally log in or sign up!