Education is one thing. Using the "save the children" tactic to rile up a moral panic that then allows prominent voices to convince ppl that the only possible solution is more state-run surveillance and policing .... Is a whole other thing.

The article links this WHO article that suggests alternative approaches to the problem

My critique was that this message would best be spread by a group not engaging in the behavior. I don't condone sextortion. Learning about real risks is a good idea. Learning how to mitigate those risks without appealing to institutions that are part of the problem: priceless.

I don't care what legal status is currently applied to it. Plenty of things I oppose are legal and plenty of things I support are illegal. Crime is a word that has zero weight with me. All it does is clue me in that the person using it may have a faith in law that will make communication challenging and possibly unproductive for me. In some cases it may just be a word meaning (thing I strongly oppose) in which case, fine.