[email protected] misusing the term ‘child porn’. Again.

May 30, 2016, Admin, EVB Analysis, Media Complaints,

"Glee actor Mark Salling charged over child porn possession"

We have filed a formal complaint with the BBC about their use of the term 'child porn' in yet another headline. These are the facts of the case:

Former Glee actor Mark Salling has been formally charged with two counts of receiving and possessing images of child sexual abuse. ...

The actor was charged with one count of using the internet to obtain a pornographic still image and video of young girls, and a second count of possessing two child pornography videos that also feature young girls. ....

This is the text of our complain:

Salling was not arrested for 'child porn'. He was arrested for possessing images of child sexual abuse. The term 'child porn' is inaccurate and misleading conflating the sexualised violence experienced by children with legal forms of pornography available. We see the impact of this minimising term every single time someone claims that looking at images of children being sexually abused isn't really a 'big deal' (see John Grisham).

We need to be clear that there are two stages of sexualised violence at work: 1) the making of images or videos of children being sexually abused, raped, and tortured; and 2) people, the vast majority men, viewing these images. Looking at these images causes actual harm to children, just as it does when their bodies are abused and tortured in the production of these images. Both those who make these images and those who view these images are complicit in child sexual abuse. The language you use must make this clear.

'child porn', BBC, child rape, child sexual abuse, Images of Child Sexual Abuse

‹ #PredatoryPeacekeepers – the importance of naming the problem (content note) The victim blaming of Amber Heard ›