--- Delirium delirium@rufus.d2g.com wrote:
Of the ones you cited, I think the great majority should be included with "click here for a photo of [blah]", not inline in articles.
Fair enough.
I do not generally want to see a graphic picture of an aborted fetus even if I am reading an article on abortion; if I wish to do so, I am quite
capable of clicking on the link to display the image. I see no benefit to forcing our readers to see images they may not wish to see based on a highly POV claim that they are "normal" images that they should not be offended by.
Granted, yet since offense is subjective, do we have a committee/voting cabal that decides which picture is inline and which picture is "offensive"?
Of course, if the picture was included in the article for "shock value", I would remove it myself.
If the picture, however, "made" the article, it would not be adequate to relegate it to another 1-click page. I specifically have in mind the picture of the student standing in front of a tank in tanamen square. I think if we had such a picture, it might be seen as offensive by some, yet would entirely belong in the article.
But I see your point very well.
===== Christopher Mahan chris_mahan@yahoo.com 818.943.1850 cell http://www.christophermahan.com/
__________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus