U.S. vs Matthews
U.S. vs Matthews
By Timothy Doan
I think the ruling was fair because it was a sensitive subject. He should have had documentation he was doing a story before he started trading pictures online.
Reporters have to be careful, and make sure what they are doing is not going to get them into trouble. Matthews may not have had any intent of using child pornography for personal means, but he should have known better before doing something illegal.
This ruling will affect the caution of reporters. The ruling will remind reporters to think twice before doing a story.
If the story was just pornography, it would have been alright. Pornography is legal, but child pornography is not.
Child pornography is different because children pornography will always be ruled as illegal. As a student journalist, I understand that Matthews could have been doing story, but as a reporter you still have to be law abiding.
