OurScene TV – life/style tv for the LGBTQ community

Facebook has some great PR

It is not often that my passion for politics and LGBT causes coincides with something relevant to my professional life as a communications expert.  However the supposedly BIG announcement that Facebook has added Civil Unions and Domestic Partnership to its list of Relationships is one of those incidences.

LINK: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/02/17/facebook-adds-civil-union_n_824758.html?ref=fb&src=sp

Many of my friends have shared this and tweeted about this and in general have welcomed the new classifications.  My aim here is not to argue about whether these changes are good - they undoubtedly are.  Neither do I want to get into the discussion about whether people should proclaim to the world they are gay by choosing one of these relationship status monikers. And the discussion about why we need to have these at all as a validation of our relationships is outside the scope of this post.

But I would like to point out this change for what it is.  Instead of being some incredibly huge step forward, the recent announcement is really a delayed correction of an error that should never had occurred in the first place.
Consider that Facebook was launched in 2004 at Harvard, and then opened to other elite universities. Marriage equality came to Massachusetts that same year on May 17. Being the best and brightest, the founder(s) could hardly have been unaware of the varying status of gay relationships around the country.

Now I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt and say that since this was limited to students at the outset, the even the term *married* would not have been broadly relevant. But when they opened the network to all users 13 and over on September 26, 2006, I cannot believe that they overlooked adding civil unions and domestic partnership as options.  After all, Facebook was not some outgrowth of an old church newsletter in Alabama.

Pollyannas would say that because these folks lived in Massachusetts, they probably felt that *married* would be used by gay couples in longstanding relationships regardless of their actual legal status.  I╒m more inclined to think that this was laziness at best or a blatant disregard for this as a relevant issue.

In fact, I remember contacting Facebook about adding these options when I first started using it.  I never got a response.  And their own people say this was one of the most requested features.  (Which they have apparently ignored for years.)

The change is welcome, but this addition of new gay-relevant relationships status options in perspective is no more earth-shattering for Facebook than the New York Times apologizing for a typo on its front page.  In reality, it is a sad state of affairs when Ivy Leaguers actively CHOOSE to ignore the differing status of our relationships.

I tip my hat to the PR folks at Facebook who have been able to frame this change as some customer service/responsiveness action, as opposed to the mea culpa it should be. Bravo!

(As an side, I look forward to the day when Facebook can get rid of these other classifications and everyone can just choose *married*.)

• [ 0 comments ]
• Email to a friend
• podcast