**WARNING** According to Facebook, the image and accompanying verbiage you will encounter in this blog are "not suitable to appear on Facebook" in part because they received "negative user feedback concerning the ad's content."
Normally, I try to start my blogs with a reasonable opening. Today I can't find one. I've been pregnant three times and have worked in the maternity industry for five years. To me, pregnancy is a joyful, beautiful time. One of the reasons I've loved this industry so much is because it isn't filled with people who are angry or spiteful or nasty. Babies put people in a good mood and that's a very good thing.
That's not to say, though, that I haven't seen controversy spring up. From an online standpoint, controversy generally springs up in the form of written arguments for or against a particular topic such as vaccinations. The only controversy I've ever seen that relates to images has been in the case of photos of women breastfeeding. Personally, I don't see anything wrong with that, but I do understand why some of the photos I've seen would make some people uncomfortable.
Fast forward to what I was greeted with in my inbox this morning. An email from the Facebook Ads Team (who, conveniently, leave no way of contacting them back). Three days ago, I reactivated an ad that I ran two years ago. Exact same ad. Same photo; same verbiage; same targeted audience. Just clicked the button and changed its status from "paused" to "active". I'll admit, it did seem odd to me that I wasn't getting the level of click throughs on the ad that I did last time. When I read the email, I was livid. I've pasted below exactly what they sent me (apologies for the image; I had to blow it up significantly so it was readable here).
So, yeah, can you see why I'm a little hot over this? The image that they say is "not suitable" shows absolutely no nudity of anything that could be considered a "private part" anywhere in the western world. It is a profesional image that I purchased the right to use many years back and HAVE used on Facebook before in an ad campaign that then ran for over two weeks. It's a woman's belly for crying out loud! How, please tell me, is this photo not suitable or offensive in any way?
As for the content, it states that the ad was disapproved due to "negative user feedback concerning the ad's content". Huh? The ad's content is this:
100% natural gifts for new mothers and mothers-to-be. Get exclusive offers by becoming a fan today!
- women
- living in the US
- age 21-40
- who are in a relationship, are engaged or married
- who are not already connected with Eternal Maternal
- who like Isabella Oliver Maternity, Motherhood Maternity, or pregnancy
Again, THIS is improper targeting for an ad that promotes maternity products? I'm at a loss.
SO, dear readers, if YOU think this is a load of poo like I do, please take a moment to support me. You can send a little "suggestion" to FB on how they can improve their ads by following this link: www.facebook.com/help/contact.php?show_form=ads_suggestions The name of the ad is Eternal Maternal. Let them know that images like this ARE suitable for FB. Let them know that this content is NOT offensive. Let them know that a mama bear is not one to mess with!
And, thanks tons to all! Our readers, followers, retailers and customers are THE BEST!!
THAT received negative user feedback? The email tells me that, in general, negative feedback is given for "offensive content" or improperly targeted audience. (1) If someone can explain to me what was offensive about the verbiage, I'd love to hear their argument. (2) The targeted audience for this ad was:
But plain old cloth diapers can be boring. What's a trendy momma to do? As always, we've got you covered! Our lovely new burp rags are the answer! They start out as pre-washed 100% cotton diapers and, after we glam 'em up with super soft fabric flowers, you've got burp rags so beautiful everyone will want to use them! 
