Of course, there are materials that are illegal to view
in one country that
are perfectly legal in another. It is probably illegal to view neutral
accounts of the Tianenmen Square protests in 1989. It is not in most other
countries and would obviously considered as verifiable material.
However, I understand that there is an Optional Protocol to the
International Convention on the Rights of the Child see (
http://www.law-ref.org/CHILDPROTOCOL2/index.html ).
Perhaps it should be considered a banning offence to provide links to
materials that contravene this protocol or to upload images that contravene
it. As it is an international agreement, it might be considered as more of
an international standard. Such materials should certainly not be considered
to be verifiable and editors should be encouraged to remove it on sight.
This suggestion is over the top. Who makes the decision about whether
some site is illegal? Who verifies that? It's frightening to think
that some Big Brother is sitting in a tower somewhere making that kind
of decision that would affect us all.
Ec