A message claims that Facebook finds an image of a saluting amputee veteran “offensive”. The message implores readers to share the photo as a form of protest again Facebook
Many variants of this message also make the additional claim that Facebook is removing the photo. Some examples are below.
FACEBOOK SAYS THIS PHOTO IS OFFENSIVE. SHARE THE HELL OUT OF IT
Facebook informed this family that this photo is offensive, could my friends on here please HELP HONOR THIS VET PAYING HIS RESPECTS TO HIS FRIEND WE CAN DO OUR PART BY SHARING IT …….. Thank you
Such claims are false. There is simply no evidence or reasoning to backup the baseless claim that Facebook (or any Facebook employee) finds the photo of the veteran offensive, or that anyone is trying to remove the photo from the Facebook platform.
This claim – and the photo itself – have been spreading since at least 2015, with some popular variants of the photo (and claim) accumulating over 1 million shares. On hindsight, this should be enough evidence to dismiss the claim itself, since if the photo was really being removed, it wouldn’t be accruing so many shares.
The photo of the veteran is actually Casey Owens who was wounded in Iraq. The photo shows him at President George Bush Jr’s second inauguration. Sadly Owens committed suicide in 2014 due to the effects of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder.
Sponsored Content. Continued below...
The notion that Facebook is trying to remove a photo or finds it offensive is a common ploy by spammers and fraudsters to trick well meaning Facebook users into sharing content across the social media platform. In the past, other images – including military emblems or depictions of the Nativity Scene – are also used as bait in similar schemes.
The reality is that Facebook and the technology they harness is sophisticated enough to remove photos from their platform instantly if they really do want them off their platform. Hence, if you do see such a photo on their platform along with the claim that Facebook is removing the image, then it has effectively debunked itself.
We dismiss more examples of this type of hoax in our blog post here.
