Journalists who expose violence need to have an effective, broad-based outlet for their evidence.
The concept of the beheading video is just media sensationalism. What about the things that our own governments do? Should that be banned also? Because the beheading thing is the Red Herring that they know you’ll fall for. It’s banning videos of what we do to our own citizens that they actually don’t want published.
As long as it’s not done as mere gratuitous “gorenography” (which is still banned here on FB, btw) then it’s only right that it should be allowed.
Not allowing evidentiary violence is called censorship and blinds us to truth about what goes on in our world by offering is only a false, sanitized image posing as reality.
There’s a false equivalence between violent images and sexual images. They are in no way equally weighted in the human experience. Whereas images of a violent nature expose crimes, images of a sexual nature, whether it’s a narcissistic selfy or professionally produced porn, are exploitative by definition.
So, you see, the false equivalence is found in associating evidence with socio-economic exploitation. Apples and oranges.
That being said, you can see how evidentiary violence is a necessary thing that should be embraced as something that sheds light on the crimes of evil-doers, even if your sensibilities disdain such horrors, while exploitative sexuality, regardless of how much you enjoy it, degrades both subject and viewer.
Facebook has made the correct choice.