Quote Originally Posted by squark View Post
meh, it's not that hard. Staging and taking the photographs is itself a criminal act, so circulating them whether or not you took them makes you an accessory to the crime.

Unless of course you're trying to gather evidence of a crime without actually participating in it or enabling it. (A photographer catching someone in the act of this or another crime for example.)

In other words, it doesn't even have to be a matter of censorship in that case. A serial killer's photographer complicit in the acts while not reporting the crimes likewise would be an accessory to the murders. A reporter on the other hand is not unless they hide the identity of the criminal from the police. So while people generally see crimes as bad heh, certain material can be stopped from being put into circulation because of its ties with a crime rather than it being a matter of censorship (whether certain material can be published when gathered by a reporter etc however would fall into the censorship or not camp and is a more complex matter, but in the case of child porn these could not be published at all since the victim is a minor and cannot give consent.)
yes I agree, stopping child porn has little to do with censorship ultimately