Reason.com - Free Minds and Free Markets
Reason logo Reason logo
  • Latest
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Archives
    • Subscribe
    • Crossword
  • Video
  • Podcasts
    • All Shows
    • The Reason Roundtable
    • The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
    • The Soho Forum Debates
    • Just Asking Questions
    • The Best of Reason Magazine
    • Why We Can't Have Nice Things
  • Volokh
  • Newsletters
  • Donate
    • Donate Online
    • Donate Crypto
    • Ways To Give To Reason Foundation
    • Torchbearer Society
    • Planned Giving
  • Subscribe
    • Reason Plus Subscription
    • Print Subscription
    • Gift Subscriptions
    • Subscriber Support

Login Form

Create new account
Forgot password

Culture

Facebook Apologizes For Using Photo of 17-Year-Old Girl Who Committed Suicide in Dating Ad

Killed herself after being bullied online

Reason Staff | 9.18.2013 2:10 PM

Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Facebook has apologised for publishing a dating ad featuring a photo of a 17-year-old who had killed herself after complaining of being cyber-bullied.

Canadian Rehtaeh Parsons took her own life in April having been severely bullied after a separate photo, showing her alleged rape by four boys, was circulated online, her mother has said.

Her father said on Wednesday that he had been "disgusted" by the advert.

Start your day with Reason. Get a daily brief of the most important stories and trends every weekday morning when you subscribe to Reason Roundup.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

NEXT: House Moving to Vote to Defund Obamacare

Reason Staff
CultureScience & TechnologyFacebook
Share on FacebookShare on XShare on RedditShare by emailPrint friendly versionCopy page URL
Media Contact & Reprint Requests

Hide Comments (4)

Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.

  1. Killazontherun   12 years ago

    Of the millions of pictures they have access to and rights to use, they pick the one that would result in the most possible PR damage? Internal sabotage?

    1. Malvolio   12 years ago

      Never ascribe to malice that which can be adequately explained by stupidity.

  2. Robert   12 years ago

    Obviously somebody goofed trying to cheap out & grab a pic of a pretty young lady without paying stock photo charges. Somebody did a quick search, this picture was in the news, didn't look at the story, and figured that it was free for commercial use.

    But the story also said:

    Two 18-year-old men have since appeared in court charged with child pornography offences.

    WTF? No explanation of what that had to do with this. Clearly the photo used, a head shot, was not pornographic. Maybe it had to do with some other porn that was somehow connected to this person's harassment.

  3. johnl   12 years ago

    She was very pretty so FB used her picture in an advertisement. There is no malice there. Her family says that someone else assaulted her and someone else still published photos of the assault. That's bad but FB didn't do it. The lawsuit is a shameless attempt to pimp out a corpse by a family that obviously had no affection for the victim. Stupidity doesn't explain this.

Please log in to post comments

Mute this user?

  • Mute User
  • Cancel

Ban this user?

  • Ban User
  • Cancel

Un-ban this user?

  • Un-ban User
  • Cancel

Nuke this user?

  • Nuke User
  • Cancel

Un-nuke this user?

  • Un-nuke User
  • Cancel

Flag this comment?

  • Flag Comment
  • Cancel

Un-flag this comment?

  • Un-flag Comment
  • Cancel

Latest

She Got a Permit for Her Chickens. Now the City Is Fining Her $80,000.

C. Jarrett Dieterle | 6.28.2025 6:30 AM

'We Can't Let These Sheep Go'

Fiona Harrigan | From the July 2025 issue

New Orleans City Council Considers Ordinance To Adopt Real-Time Facial Recognition Technology

Ronald Bailey | 6.27.2025 5:00 PM

Clarence Thomas Undermines Free Speech in Porn Site Age-Verification Case

Damon Root | 6.27.2025 4:00 PM

America Has Plenty of Experience With Government-Run Stores, and It Isn't Pretty

Joe Lancaster | 6.27.2025 3:40 PM

Recommended

  • About
  • Browse Topics
  • Events
  • Staff
  • Jobs
  • Donate
  • Advertise
  • Subscribe
  • Contact
  • Media
  • Shop
  • Amazon
Reason Facebook@reason on XReason InstagramReason TikTokReason YoutubeApple PodcastsReason on FlipboardReason RSS

© 2024 Reason Foundation | Accessibility | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

r

Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

This modal will close in 10

Reason Plus

Special Offer!

  • Full digital edition access
  • No ads
  • Commenting privileges

Just $25 per year

Join Today!