[WikiEN-l] Offensive photos policy

Wed May 12 22:16:56 UTC 2004

Erik Moeller wrote:
> Jimmy-
> > With photos, the "show" versus "don't show" really is an "either/or",
> > though.  The only possible compromise, and one which I think will
> > almost always work just fine, is to *link* to the picture, with
> > suitable warnings, and leave it at that.
> 
> If we make this official policy, we abandon NPOV for photos, for the  
> reasons I have cited. Please refute my arguments or state clearly that you  
> do want to abandon NPOV for photos.

I do not agree that this is an abandonment of NPOV at all.  Perhaps
you have misunderstood what I am saying?  I will try to be more clear.

"The neutral point of view attempts to present ideas and facts in such
a fashion that both supporters and opponents can agree. Of course,
100% agreement is not possible; there are ideologues in the world who
will not concede to any presentation other than a forceful statement
of their own point of view. We can only seek a type of writing that is
agreeable to essentially rational people who may differ on particular
points."  That's the original paragraph that dates from when I coined
the term, I'm pretty sure.

With text, there are a huge number of options available to us to seek
a presentation such that "both supporters and opponents can agree".

With specfic images, our range of options is nearly always more
limited.  We can show the image on the page.  We can show the image
behind a link.  We can delete the image entirely.  In some cases, but
probably not the most interesting or controversial ones, we can modify
the image.

With such a limited range of options, the one that is most likely to
be satisfactory to both supporters and opponents is to keep the image
but place it behind a link, with appropriate warnings.

This is not a retreat from NPOV, it is the essence of NPOV.

It is true that some extreme fanatics may say that a photo of X must
be shown immediately at the top of an article, or that photos of X
must not be shown at all.  "100% agreement is not possible; there are
ideologues in the world who will not concede to any presentation other
than a forceful statement of their own point of view."

But reasonable people will, I believe, in most cases agree that the
"behind a link" is a sensible compromise.

--Jimbo