I've sent the author the following email: ===== Hi Radhika, I was reading your article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11158863/Snapchat-nude-

I've sent the author the following email: ===== Hi Radhika, I was reading your article: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11158863/Snapchat-nude-photo-leak-Now-the-hackers-are-going-after-children.html http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11158863/Snapch... ... and was surprised to see the photo used was of Matt Lee. Matt is a supporter of the Free Software Foundation, and a hacker in the sense that he is a programmer, not a criminal who breaks into computer systems. He's certainly not one of the people responsible for the crimes enumerated in your article, and you've done him a grave injustice by using his likeness in this way. You're also impugning the FSF, as their stickers appear prominently on Matt's computer in the photo. Could you please have the photo removed as soon as possible? To avoid mistakes like this in the future, I suggest you have a read of this article, which explains the hacker vs. cracker nuance: http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/hacker-vs-cracker/ http://www.techrepublic.com/blog/it-security/hacker-vs-crack... Also, the jargon file definition of the term might be of use: http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html http://www.catb.org/jargon/html/H/hacker.html I see from your profile that you're a trainee journalist. I hope this will turn out to be a good learning experience (even if it's your editor who picked the photo!), and that you haven't summoned too large an Internet Pitchfork Mob with this article :) =====