I would like to bring attention the Gazette’s use of the term “child pornography” in a recent article (“Child porn sentence for Jan. 6 participant”, March 30). The term child pornography has long been avoided by people in a multitude of professions that deal with child abuse. The word pornography implies consent by the child, and hints at sexual gratification while trivializing the horrid sexual abuse of the child depicted in the images. Shortening pornography to porn in the story’s headline may save space, but it even further minimizes the exploitation of children.
While the phrase child pornography still appears in our laws and legal statutes, the Department of Justice, National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, many (if not most) major U.S. publications, and countless others use the more accurate term, “child sexual abuse material” (CSAM). Additionally, child protection bills making their way through the Massachusetts Legislature, such as those dealing with AI-generated images, have avoided using child pornography and instead use child sexual abuse material.
Such images are not pornography; they are the documentation of some of the most egregious crimes committed against children. And as the images are further distributed, the assault on the victims continues indefinitely. I hope that faced with a better understanding of the issue, that the Daily Hampshire Gazette will join many of its colleagues and decide to stop using the term child pornography.
Brian Lynn
Northampton