Marriah Greene, Unborn Baby With Popular Facebook Profile, Deleted From Social Network (VIDEO)

Marriah Greene hardly exists, but she already has a Facebook following. Or, she did before the social network caught wind and pulled her profile from the site.

Ellie Greene, the unborn baby's mother, created the profile, which soon became a journal of sorts as friends and relatives began friending and interacting with the profile.

According to ABC News, Greene posted little quips and quotes, such as listing the baby's education as "Studied Labor and Delivery at Tummy University."

CNN reports that Marriah Greene's Facebook profile was a bit more than just a project, it's how the couple, 37-year-old Matt Greene and his 25-year-old wife Ellie, chose to announce they were having a baby.

By June 1, the baby's profile already had over 350 friend requests, according to ABC, though the parents did not accept all, especially those from strangers. The Greenes also said that the vast majority of the comments were positive, outnumbering negative posts by about 40 to one.

But Facebook seems to have put the little experiment on ice. The expecting couple told The Blaze that they believe Facebook took down Marriah's profile. Indeed, the profile was no longer accessible on Facebook.com on Thursday.

Facebook did not give a reason for pulling the page, although the site's Statement of Rights and Responsibilities does not allow users to "provide any false personal information on Facebook, or create an account for anyone other than yourself without permission." However, the parents might have avoided the issue if they had created a Facebook Page for Marriah, rather than a personal profile. For example, Coca-cola maintains a brand page that does not qualify as a profile. Even Mark Zuckerberg's dog has its own Facebook page.

WATCH:

Comments

[Linda Doty Attreed]

09:25 AM on 06/07/2011

He has a problem and needs therapy for sexual addiction or voyeurism- should not be in public office as he is bad example for people to have in office- how on earth could he propose any legislation to protect children or adults if he is this sick or ignorant? His poor wife and family do not need to be in a spotlight like this!!!

[RudeGubmintWorker]

11:59 PM on 06/05/2011

Until I read this, I would not have believed an unborn baby would have a "following". Whoo, someone out there is having a baby. It takes no talent for this. And this unborn child will likely turn out to be another uninteresting, mediocre adult.

I don't expect anyone but my friends on my otherwise private profile to be interested in my mundane life. And not even all of them are interested. Why didn't this couple just post their pregnancy stories on their own Facebook pages? At least they wouldn't be deleted that way, and it would save strangers of the annoyance of running across a page for a fetus.

[GiannaX]

11:56 PM on 06/04/2011

This article has nothing to do with your twisted NeoCon view on women's reproductive rights. Flagged!

[raptureready1958]

06:56 PM on 06/03/2011

I see nothing wrong with what these parents did. It did not need to be removed from the site.

[David Tạ]

09:03 AM on 06/05/2011

While you saw nothing wrong the couple did violate the terms of service by Facebook. Facebook had the right and reason to delete the profile, but like the article said the couple could have avoided this if they created a Page instead of a profile.

[Kristina Noetzelman]

05:56 PM on 06/05/2011

I agree with David, while I don't think it was wrong either it was against the rules. They could have had the profile in the moms name and had it be her pregnancy journal. They broke the rules by having it be in someone elses name, and being a under 13 user. Rules are there for a reason, whether we agree with them or not we can't just disregard them on a whim.

[eucharius]

04:59 PM on 06/03/2011

But corporations ARE people, dontcha know! ;)

[Arnoldas Grigutis]

04:01 PM on 06/03/2011

people naming their kids after facebook apps, now a profile for an unborn baby. It is disgusting, good job by facebook

[VABackpacker]

03:46 PM on 06/03/2011

Probably a Four Square kinda girl anyways.

[texpatstarling]

02:12 PM on 06/03/2011

I know Matt and Ellie. Ellie grew up on Mercy Ships, and spent her childhood literally traveling the world via ship. Because of that, she and her family have friends all over, so a lot of them are only virtual at this point. That's the main reason why this made sense.
Since Facebook shut down the profile, they started a fan page for her, for us to keep track of.

[leylah154]

08:29 AM on 06/03/2011

The Statement of Rights and Responsibilities also says that you have to be at least 13 years of age to use Facebook... I'm pretty sure that is not a 13 year old fetus...

[gemini68]

10:11 AM on 06/03/2011

That's for a profile page. If they had created a fan page it wouldn't be an issue. But they probably didn't know they could do that.

[JeffJeckyll]

05:16 AM on 06/03/2011

are people still having babies?

[NonConforming]

07:27 PM on 06/03/2011

Not in San Francisco.

[GiannaX]

12:04 AM on 06/05/2011

Good! The planet is overpopulated as it is.

[snake griffin]

04:55 PM on 06/02/2011

Let me guess, they don't have a lot of non-virtual friends do they?

[Ramon Moreno]

04:52 PM on 06/02/2011

Families are narcissists, and they're destroying Face Book with their inability to cull extraneous pictures and info. I don't need to see 18 photos that aren't even distinguishable from one another. This is more of the same, no more. It just has that faint hint of an abortion debate to fuel its travel through our "news cycle". Fetus Fail.

[Adam Story]

04:43 PM on 06/02/2011

How can we be sure that tis wasn't an Onion joke?

[Stony Curtis]

04:36 PM on 06/02/2011

Zuckerberg aborted the fetus page, eh.

Facebook has issues that go way beyond "Rights and Responsibilities".

[FTracy3]

04:01 PM on 06/02/2011

I thought the Facebook users' right to choose worked both ways.