I have trouble finding more good than harm in freely sharing art like this. It goes around, and winds up being shared without explanation. With that, the art is misinterpreted. Sometimes by mistake. Sometimes purposefully used as an abusive tool, for sheer shock value, maligning the artist to make some point that's irrelevant to the original reason for the art, and sick things I don't need to describe. Even here, good people have made mistakes in noting art by Kim Noble. Those mistakes were resolved HERE, because we are pro, and will be again, when they come up again. Also, there's the "smile-faced" paintings with the barred window.

It's so easy for anonymous people to intentionally, and publicly, misconstrue art like this. I'm not saying it should be censored, but I wish there was some way to protect artist/victims from misuse, misinterpretation, and misrepresentation of the art they produce. This is problematic on many levels, and makes for a legit study, with some financial backing. The gov back$ all kinds of art $tudie$. Heads up to all grant writers who want to risk their lives.

So powerful.

rule 1 you have to establish relevance to the investigation. This is more appropriate for /v/pizzagatewhatever