A note about our child pornography opinion piece.
Salon published an opinion piece headlined “Why I Need to See Child Porn” by Debbie Nathan on Aug. 25. The story argued that under child pornography laws, Nathan and other journalists and researchers had no protection from prosecution if they viewed visual depictions of child pornography, even inadvertently, in the course of their work. In fact, federal law does offer some legal protection for journalists and other researchers. An “affirmative defense” may exist that would protect such work under certain circumstances, and the opinion asserted by Nathan that her work, and the work of other journalists, would constitute a violation of the law was inaccurate.
Salon regrets the error and has removed the article from the site.
The Jeremy Lin show
Santorum tests positive and negative
When sexy ads cross the line
House Republicans lose their will to fight
When Iran and Israel were friendly
The anti-Santorum onslaught begins
Occupy defends the Volcker Rule
Nancy Grace is more terrible than ever
How to write about poor people
Obama to unions: See you later 

