How can Facebook justify Page rules for Jump On It?

Posted by on Sep 14, 2010 in Facebook | 2 Comments

I have a problem with the way Facebook is monitoring Facebook pages, Sydney based company called “Jump on it” has created several Facebook pages which have gone viral the problem been these generic pages names do not represent the business name fairly.

The reason I am annoyed by this is because I own several large Facebook pages which have had generic names linked to websites I own. Facebook approached me and told me to add website urls or slogans to each page because they represent “generic concepts” for example I have “Tattoos” which has around 80,000 user base – page and Facebook said I needed to change the name to “Tattoos by Gangsta Tattoos”, The page is now verified but it does not have the same appeal as the old name.

Jump On it has been receiving a large amount of press recently with the use of their Facebook page “I Love Sydney” the reason is this page is generic how have they been able to promote their business for so long with the same name? Why isn’t the page “I Love Sydney by Jump On it” I now see the company has done the same thing for a whole bunch of areas for example: “I love Melbourne” & “I Love Auckland”. It would be quite evident that Facebook is aware of this page name yet I have a suspicion that as they are a ad spender on Facebook then they are aloud to use this name.

I Love Sydney Jump On it

I Love Sydney Jump On it

Here is the email I received when I tried to Authenticate my “Tattoos” page:


Unfortunately we will only be able to authenticate your Page if we change your Page’s name to Tattoos. We are requiring a byline because Pages should reflect the accurate voice of the person or the company that’s administering the Page. Please let us know if this is an acceptable alternative and we’ll make this change for you.

If you are unable to do so, your Page’s publishing rights will be blocked because it violates our Pages Terms of Use. Keep in mind, Facebook restricts the publishing rights of inauthentic Pages that impersonate other entities, represent generic concepts, spam users, or otherwise violate our Terms of Use. These policies are designed to ensure Facebook remains a safe, secure and trusted environment for all users.

I mean this stuff does sound like I am been a winger but I feel that if their are rules for one person on Facebook they should be the same for all because it is highly unfair.

What are your thoughts on this? I think it is a big issue –

2 Comments

  1. Jamie
    March 15, 2011

    Good article!

    It is even worse as they purchased the admin rights to the group when it already had 100,000 fans!

    I am thinking of using a generic “phrase” page such as “Fast Food Friday’s” for a fast food outlet as an example. Do you think that this will be banned if we get a significant following?

    Reply
  2. SEO & Social Media
    March 15, 2011

    If you own the brand name/trademark then you will not have any problem. The thing is Facebook really turns a blind eye to pages, the time when they start blocking your wall feed is when you have over 10,000+ fans I have several pages where they block the wall feed automatically then you have to verify the page with Facebook direct.

    Where did you hear jump on it purchased the page at 100K what is the source?

    Reply

Leave a Reply

*