Features, settings & updates

[zstains]

I'm trying to upload photographs to use as my backdrop folder. The photographs are all of classical statues and art, paintings, sculptures, etc. all of the ones that show anything resembling a female breast or male genitalia are flagged as 'inappropriate content' even though these are universally admired works of art in some cases hundreds of years old. Is there anyway to get around this ridiculous censorship? Who does Roku think they are? I just created my account and I'm ready to cancel it and toss the brand new Roku TV I just bought in favor of getting something less moralistically superior. If there is an obvious solution to this that I've missed that I apologize for my rant, but no matter how you look at it the first impression here is that Roku is appearing to say that it knows more about what each of us need privately then we do. The Backdrops Stream isn't even public so the idea of censoring it is beyond ridiculous, it's arrogant and deeply insulting. I suppose if I want to put pictures of my kids splashing around in the bath on my Backdrops that too would be censored because naked children are unnatural and offensive? What was it Oscar Wilde said? "If God had intended man to be naked he would've been born that way".  

[RokuJohnB]

Hi @zstains,

Thank you for your first post here in the Roku Community!

We want to gather more information regarding your concern. Can you please provide us with the names of these classic works of art you are trying to upload?

With detailed information, we will be able to assist you further.

Best regards,
John

[martyandhope]

I have a similar problem.   I am trying to upload pictures from our pool and lake party.   Adult males and females are in attendance.  All are covered appropriately.  Shirtless males and women in bikinis or one piece full torso suits.   Half of the pictures get flagged.   What's up?

[furski245]

 I agree it's completely ridiculous. I entered a photo of a myself at my swimming pool from a few yrs ago in my memories folder and it was flagged. All that was showing was my bare chest and face.. but to go as far as to ban classical art/sculptures etc depicting nudity which we can all see in museums or on tv frequently is beyond controlling and petty -- a total overreach in every regard. 

Regardless of any of this I'm an adult and I have no kids and this is for my consumption and my guests... It's ludicrous in the extreme. 

[furski245]

Inexcusable that u are flagging this sort or content... 

[zstains]

I don't know the names of the works in particular but I can upload photographs of them if that's possible.

I tried to upload examples but was not allowed to. I keep getting error messages when I press send so I'm sending just words instead.  I'm afraid they may turn out to be more offensive than the photos in question .

The censored images are of works all created circa 1885-1900 in New York City by the world famous sculptors/painters Bitter & Moretti who also did the doors of Trinity Church on Wall Srret and the 'Nude Girl in the Fountain' in front of the Plaza Hotel in NYC as well as many sculptures for Stanford White buildings in NYC such as the Metropolitan Museum of Art, The NY Public Library in Bryant Park, The Manhattan Club, and the Main Office of the Post which is now the new Penn Station in NYC.

Roku's censorship of these works of art among many others as will as of personal photographs  makes Roku look foolish and small minded to say the least.  We are not in kindergarten.  What's more the censorship of personal pictures of 'not completely covered up people' on their own private televisions is stuck in the past and Victorian at the very least, and inappropriately overreaching and judgmental in its attempts to what? Protect children? Shape society's morality in the way that Roku feels is best?  

It's a slippery slope and Roku is in danger of losing its footing.  Ironically the examples provided here were all created during the Victorian era, the public fashion of the day seeking to conceal any and all flesh beyond the face and hands.  Actually, gloves were also in fashion. Yet at the same time nudity in art was admired and valued and even expected. 

All that aside, if I want to put pictures of **bleep** and ass on my own tv in my own house I should be able to do so without the manufacturer of the television telling me I can't.  If I put a **bleep** dvd in the player to play on my Roku tv it works. So please explain to me how that is?  I suppose one of two things is going to happen now: either you're going to change the algorithms to stop censoring what Roku feels are inappropriate images or someone at Roku is going to make it impossible to play **bleep** on their TVs through a separate machine.

I'm interested to see how this goes because one outcome will engender admiration for Roku for listening, learning, and adjusting and the other will... not.