On 3 Apr 2006, at 13:24, SP wrote:
I also have a slightly different opinion on the use of this photo
(or a
similar free one) for educational purposes. While the image itself is
horrible because it depicts the sexual exploitation of a child, its
use
for educational purposes is not horrible. It is one of the least
offensive images available to illustrates the sexual exploitation of a
child. There are ways to make it obvious that it is being used for
educational purposes. Displaying the image lower on the page, reducing
the size of the image or using a link are possibilities. It has not
been
used that way on Wikipedia and that is the problem. There are editors
arguing for the inclusion of the image because there is nothing
offensive about the image. These comments will get use close scrutiny
from groups like Perverted Justice. I don't know how it fix that as
long
as we permit open discussion on talk pages.
And why exactly is it necessary to use an image. Surely this is a
case where
a word is better than a thousand images.
Educational use is not a permitted exemption for showing child
pornography
in any jurisdiction.
Justinc