Printable View
The initial point by the prosecution is that BP would scrub code words (e.g. lolita) from the ads and then place them, all the while knowing (or should have been knowing) there potentially were underage boys and girls involved.
This does look very bad for them imo because what they should have been doing was notifying authorities.
More HERE
Damnnnnnnnnn
I'm having a little trouble understanding the lawsuits. First, the people suing have to have standing; they have to show that they were harmed by the party they are suing. The laws are different in different states, but I don't see how a shelter or an anti-trafficking organization can claim that they were harmed. There is a Jane Doe who may actually have been a trafficking victim, but the article doesn't say.
Secondly, I read the Senate report, and the evidence is weak. The primary evidence that Backpage knowingly ran ads for underage trafficking victims is the fact that they filtered out words like "Lolita" and "teenage". I don't hire people on Backpage, but my impression is that "teenage" means "under 30". The person you've hired doesn't necessarily match the person described in the ad. Furthermore, this seems to be widely known among people who use Backpage ads. If that's true, then the words that Backpage was filtering out had nothing to do with underage trafficking.
I'm not a lawyer and I have no personal experience with Backpage, so this is just my opinion.
The Senate report makes a lot of claims about trafficking in the US, many of which they backed with citations. I checked the citations and none of them supported the claims. Either they cited legitimate research that didn't say what the report claimed it said, or they cited people giving unsupported opinions that matched the report's claims. If the authors of the report have an opinion, citing someone else with the same opinion doesn't make the opinion a fact.
It's possible that the people who run Backpage have committed a crime or crimes. I'm sure that somewhere in corporate America, crimes are being committed at this moment. But in theory, government officials are supposed to have evidence before they make accusations.
Welcome to Donald Trump's America. Old rules no longer apply.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeseosEscandulosos
I'm no Trump fan but this has been in the cards for a long time before he got in.Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
Trump is better than Obama. Obama supported spying on us and big government. Let's free ourselves from big government and grow our individual liberties.
STFU or take it elsewhere. Fucking idiot.Quote:
Originally Posted by bostonbad
Every Obama government regulation is designed to do 1 of 4 things:Quote:
Originally Posted by BostonBad
Protect workers
Protect consumers
Protect the environment
Protect the economy from being blown up again by Wall St.
Every Trump move to remove a regulation will do 1 of 4 things:
Remove worker protections
Remove consumer protections
Remove environmental protections
Remove protections the economy has against Wall St. greed
"THE WILCOX/MCCANDLISH LAW OF ONLINE DISCOURSE EVOLUTION
The chance of success of any attempt to change the topic or direction of a thread of discussion in a networked forum is directly proportional to the quality of the current content."
Given how quickly this deteriorated into Trump vs. Obama, it must have been a pretty good discussion. I have strong opinions about Trump, but he has nothing to do with the trafficking hysteria we've been experiencing for the last 25 years.
I have given up talking about politics with only few people outside of anything I do, because people become so bitter or enraged no matter what side of the fence they sit. This isn't something new we are seeing, but some sort accumulation of anger built over the last several years. I have an idea what it is, but good luck trying to get to mention it, lol. Doesn't matter, I am curious what our world will look like in a couple of years. And of course no mere mortal knows the outcome so we can only wait watch.
Back to Backpage there has been increase in going after prostitution. They say the prostitutes are the victims, or families are the victims or they will claim their must be some trafficking going even where there is little evidence. Lets see if Hawaii handles legal prostitution if it passes. http://abcnews.go.com/International/...ustry-45257808. I hope they can show it to be successful. And I know where a lot of you are taking your vacation soon, lol.
I was in a city council meeting and they claim minors are approached by sex traffickers. Every 90 minutes and that Jay Z with his big pimping is promoting it along with kim kardasian.
I don't get why Kim k was mentioned but jayz lyrics are a metaphors and is not about pimping women.
Just like saying something is Dope is not promoting drugs.
It was a throwaway line, but my point was not that Trump was responsible for this particular report. Rather it was that the presumption that government officials don't make claims unsupported by evidence clearly does not hold under Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by GroobySteven
Government officials have always made unsupported claims. What I said was that they weren't supposed to make unsupported accusations. In this case, two Senators are accusing private citizens of a serious crime.Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
The investigation into Backpage began before anyone took Trump seriously as a candidate. It's part of a campaign of unsupported trafficking claims going back more than two decades.
Because she's shameless. She's got 99 problems but a blush ain't one.Quote:
Originally Posted by natina
Sounds like another concoction by the right-wing fake news industry, most likely related to Kim's recent criticism of Trump's immigration ban, and the end of Kanye's love affair with Trump.Quote:
Originally Posted by natina
Keep it on topic on Backpage - otherwise it will get moved to politics.
Looking at the Bloomberg article:
"lawsuits in federal court in Arizona and Florida"
I missed the word "federal" the first time I read read this. Federal courts tend to be strict about standing. The plaintiffs are "an Arizona shelter for victims of sex trafficking and domestic abuse, a Florida anti-trafficking group, and a woman under the name Jane Doe." It's going to be difficult for a shelter and an anti-trafficking group to show that they were harmed by Backpage, so they're likely to be barred from suing. That leaves Jane Doe, who can only sue in one federal court at a time. So one of these suits is likely to be thrown out.
"The inquiry found that Backpage stripped advertisements of such terms as “Lolita” and “Amber Alert,” code words that the sex for sale was with underage girls and boys, then posted the sanitized advertisements."
Lazy reporting. The Senate report assumed that these were code words but offered no evidence. The reporter is uncritically repeating the assumption. During the time Backpage was stripping these words from ads, it reported hundreds of ads to the NCMEC because it suspected underage trafficking. It wouldn't make sense to report some ads and deliberately disguise others.
"Sex ads have simply shifted over to the “dating” section, Boies contends in court papers."
Well, obviously. But the courts have established that Backpage can't be sued for just running prostitution ads.
"On these sites, which aggregate sex ads, Backpage stripped metadata from photographs, thwarting attempts by family members and law enforcement to search the images, the plaintiffs alleged."
It also makes it harder to use the metadata to identify people who don't want their real identities made public.
Metadata can contain viruses. I don't know if there are other business reasons to strip out metadata from images.
Backpage is defending a lawsuit in Washington state and the owners face criminal charges in California. If you go to court enough times, eventually you're going to lose. I don't think any of the cases against Backpage are well founded, and this one looks pretty weak, but the accumulated litigation and risk of losing a case may force them out of business.
Its actually the ALT RIGHT fake news which is using the RIGHT WING/NEOCONSERVATIVES fake news=faux news=fox news
Alternative facts=alt reality=trumps narcissism and fragility
Quote:
Originally Posted by filghy2
Does anyone know if Backpages stripped the Metadata from all photos uploaded to their site, or just the photos in the escorts section?Quote:
Originally Posted by DeseosEscandulosos
Not really. The ones pushing this "trafficking" BS, & it is BS, are women who falsely call themselves "radical feminists". They're neither radical or feminist. The narrative is aimed at keeping as much sexwork as possible criminalized. The narrative becomes the excuse. Next section of the narrative is pushing the "Nordic plan", which shifts targeting to "pimps" & "johns", & anybody else with male genitalia. Trans women are excluded from the conversation because their package doesn't fit the narrative of the poor exploited or enslaved girls, who must be forced into the "life", because nobody could possibly make such a choice. Trans men are okay though, because they're just confused women who be shown the light.Quote:
Originally Posted by natina
Don't kid yourselves. This is misandry. It's all about criminalizing men having fun. "Sex trafficking" may or may not be a problem. There's no reliable statistics to support any of the claims. It's just a loud irrelevancy, interfering with the discussion about decriminalizing sexwork.
One thing I'll tell you about conservative areas like Dallas Tx and Raleigh NC:Quote:
Originally Posted by natina
If you take take the number of ads on bp for transgender prostitutes and divide that by the populations in those cities, you'll find a higher number of ads per capita in those areas than in true blue NYC and LA.
Admittedly not a scientific survey but it's food for thought
According to the Arizona complaint, they did it to all photos. I don't know how the plaintiffs know this. I don't see it in the Senate report.Quote:
Originally Posted by needingu
During the GOP convention in Cleveland, I read that the strip clubs and female prostitutes weren't getting much business, but the male prostitutes were pretty busy.Quote:
Originally Posted by nysprod
The lawsuits from a different perspective.
http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/news/...uments-9065197
Alt right fake news is PizzaGate
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pizz...spiracy_theory
https://en.www.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pi...spiracy_theory
Pizzagate believers think this government ad about human trafficking is new evidence
https://www.google.com/amp/www.nydai...icle-1.2964763
Quote:
Originally Posted by natina
Its all fake news to get republicans in office
See above
Quote:
Originally Posted by hippifried
Analysis of the Senate report on Backpage
http://sexworkdata.blogspot.com/2017...skill-and.html
I'll point out the punishments for the women involved are significantly higher than what the guys hiring the women face ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by hippifried
It's not criminalizing men having fun. It's legislating one group's views on morality to try to force a second population to adhere to the first group's position.
Punishment? Pffft! These asswipes are after your jobs, your networks, your livelihood, your savings, your reputation, your home, your family, your basic freedom, & that of everyone around you. Put a pricetag on that.
Youre becoming unhingedQuote:
Originally Posted by natina
This is just part of the "rolling back" of rights that have been fought for and gained over the last 50 years. I'm saddened to think that just when transgender people were starting to get the rights they deserve, they will be forced back into second class citizenship. I would guess that many transgender women were on backpage to begin with because they were completely discriminated against in the workplace and it's one of the few ways they can make money. Wendy made a great point in her post about getting the attention of Pro Transgender women, don't be stingy. What may be a few dollars to us is a lot of money to someone who doesn't have the same opportunity as us to make a living. My hope of hopes was to see transgender people working along side everyone else without discrimination, unfortunately we may have to wait a little longer for that.
I'm really too curious to find out what exactly you mean by transgender rights?Quote:
Originally Posted by ctcuteguynextdoor
Does transgend rights somehow make me more superior than a genetic woman or a senior asian- american or what about a child with Down syndrome?
Is it at all possible that everyone (under jurisdiction of the federal government) be treated equally?
The very idea some being more equal than others really frightens me
Last post on the Senate report.
http://sexworkdata.blogspot.com/2017...ackpage-2.html
Reason.com article on the report
http://reason.com/blog/2017/01/13/co...ckpage-inquiry
Ashlyn, your statement there is a fallacy. Transgender rights doesn't mean assigning special rights to transgender folks. It means enforcing the existing rights granted by law to all citizens and ensures that discrimination (whether outright or systemic) doesn't prevent someone transgender from executing those existing rights.Quote:
Originally Posted by AshlynCreamher
The position you are taking is one that's been used throughout our country's history to deny basic rights to minority citizens. Rather than listening to sound bites on right or left leaning news sources to the topic, I'd suggest you seek out some primary sources to understand the actual issues.