The ‘Times’ Asserts Kiddie Porn Viewing Rights

How scary must the New York Times legal department be when Salon is forced to run a second and much-expanded

How scary must the New York Times legal department be when Salon is forced to run a second and much-expanded correction to a story they’ve already corrected and removed from their site?

Sign Up For Our Daily Newsletter

By clicking submit, you agree to our <a href="http://observermedia.com/terms">terms of service</a> and acknowledge we may use your information to send you emails, product samples, and promotions on this website and other properties. You can opt out anytime.

See all of our newsletters

The crux of the correction, regarding a piece by Debbie Nathan on Kurt Eichenwald’s internet-child-porn reporting, is an amplification of the right of the Times—and of you!—, as per federal law, to inadvertently view kiddie porn. (Here we come a-trolling, XTube.com!)

Even though Salon is The Transom’s sworn life-long enemy, we’ll admit it’s clear they nobly did the right thing. Still, ya just can’t help but feel terrible watching such a legal beat-down. Watching the Salon-Times legal department match-up is sort of like watching Condoleeza Rice and Scooter Libby mash a bag full of kittens.

The ‘Times’ Asserts Kiddie Porn Viewing Rights