Taken literally that’s hyperbole, but it makes a lot of little brothers responsible for helping to police it without the secrecy safeguards you’d expect from a confidential government activity. It will be easy to tar people who don’t want these little brothers with the accusation that they must be for kiddie porn. Shoot, just look higher in this thread (unless an administrator has zotted it). This makes a zinger of a sound bite which takes a detailed explanation to refute.
>> Taken literally that’s hyperbole, <<
What you mean is “don’t take it literally, it’s only hyperbole” Or, in other words, “I figured people wouldn’t be as sympathetic to the rights of child pornographers, so I deceitfully tricked them into reading an article, knowing full well that my headline was a complete, absurd, bald-faced, ridiculous lie.”
Better, more truthful headline: “Unconstitutional proposal would coerce internet readers to help government track child pornographers.”