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