Magazine Called Out For Portraying Teen Who Shared Nude Photos Of His Girlfriend As Victim In Article

Sharing explicit photos without consent isn't just morally wrong—it's illegal, too.

And sharing explicit photos of a teenager without consent is even more illegal.

But don't tell NY Magazine that.

In a recent article titled "Canceled at 17" published by The Cut, journalist Elizabeth Weil told the story of the pseudonymed "Diego"—a teenage boy who shared nude photos of his then-girlfriend without her consent to do so.

The Cut shared a thread on Twitter about the article.

The incident—which took place shortly after the students returned to in-person learning in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic—framed Diego as the victim of a teenage "mean girl"-type cancellation instead of the justified ostracization of a young man who engaged in underage drinking and predatory behavior.

And needless to say, Twitter wasn't having it.

Some users felt NY Mag was making much ado about nothing, with many pointing out Diego's punishment didn't quite fit the crime.

Some users engaged in gallows humor, with many pointing out that this sort of non-punishment and "boys will be boys" mentality has been going on since time immemorial.

And still others pointed out aside from the horrifically wrong take, the article was just plain bad.

Yeah, that definitely was more than a bit cringe.

Quality—or lack thereof—of the journalism aside, there are state-by-state differences in the laws surrounding sharing explicit teen photos with or without the teen's permission.

And the penalties range from a financial fine to actual jail time and having to register as a sex offender.

So it's safe to say Diego got off easy with just a little bit of social ostracization as his "punishment."

But I think we can all agree private photos are just that—private—that you should never share pictures of anyone besides yourself without permission.