Not sure British tabloids are the best example to cite for standard setting. But I take your point. However, newspapers are unable to provide thier pictures as clickable links, it's in yer face or nothing. We have the luxury of offering choice.Tantalus said:..in fact many newspapers carry much more disturbing images on the front page ( and no i dont mean the sun) such as pictures from iraq or the asian tsunami
Tantalus said:just how far are we supposed to take this?
Take what?
All we are talking about is putting a picture as a url rather than inline. A large number of people do get offended by seeing pictures of dead animals. You can tell them that it shouldn't upset them and they shouldn't get offended, you can spring pictures of gratuitous blood letting upon them, but that is unlikely to change anything. People have different opinions and some strong feelings on the matter. They probably always will. I'm just suggesting that maybe people should consider that when posting pictures.
Nothing is being censored, no liberties are being taken away, no one is saying you cant post these pictures, no one is hiding anything, just a suggestion that they be posted as links, rather than in line. A suggestion that you give people the choice.
Here is a picture of a butchered and roasted gorillas...
http://www.all-creatures.org/anex/monkey-bush-02.jpg
Click if you want to. If you dont want to see, dont click!
Why is this a problem?