What happens when it is the 1.1%?

Comments

1 comment

  • Jennie

    Let's start with the obvious: If it's professional-grade photography or has a copyright watermark, you're fine.

    If you want to absolutely safe, turn off submissions. Second to that, you could apply the same standard that the site uses for exposure content -- they have to be holding a note with the blog name in one of the pics.

    For a more moderate approach, check their blog. Do they have other pictures of themselves on their blog? And more importantly, is it the same person?

    Have you engaged in a conversation with the submitter before? If so, it's probably okay, but if it's a random submission from someone you're not a mutual follower with or never chatted with, don't accept it.

    Are there any identifying features? If so, are they obscured? If they've taken steps to anonymize the pics, that's good.

    Does your blog follow a certain theme, and if so, does the submission match the theme? For example, a submission of a naked woman in a lawn chair reading a novel makes sense to submit to the ReadingIsSexy blog, but a random hotel bj pic does not.

    If they provide any context, does that context make sense? Does that context match the interests you've shared on your blog?

    If they submitted more than image, are the images different enough to show they were taken over a long period of time? Different clothes, different settings, different hair, etc. The more variation, the more likely they are legit. (This applies more to leaks than revenge, but leaks should be treated the same as revenge.)

    You can also save the image, then run it through tineye.com's reverse image lookup and see if you get any hits. This can help you find the image's source. If it's all over the internet, it's almost certainly not the submitter.

    Use good judgement, and don't accept *random* submissions.

    (Anecdote: I received a submission to my office/work-themed blog from a woman. Several rope bondage pics in different hotel rooms. She explained on one of them that this is what she does at work conferences. Her face was obscured in all of the pics. So those pics checked several different boxes: context, different settings, matched the blog theme, anonymized pics -- the only thing missing was that I hadn't chatted with the submitter. I let those through.)

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.