3 ms·

I specifically pointed out that I searched that key word and found no results. Even if that keyword has fallen out of use, surely something would've shown up i

I specifically pointed out that I searched that key word and found no results. Even if that keyword has fallen out of use, surely something would've shown up in the hundreds of ads I looked at. I'm trying to be a reasonable person here. What should I do to validate OP's claims? I even doubled down and looked at some actual accounts in court claims (articles about them). It says that backpage filtered searches for some key words associated with child sex trafficking but not some others, and not some misspellings of those words. Of course as soon as BP filters some words the criminals will start using others. What is the reasonable test here?

DanBC 9y ago
> What should I do to validate OP's claims? Listen to Backpage. They don't attempt to deny that they publish these ads. They do claim that the first amendment and the Communications Decency Act mean they're blameless for doing so. The fact that Backpage was telling advertisers how to avoid the filters is also widely accepted. In fact, it's worse: Backpage developed software to automatically change ads before moderating the ads. Watch the video and read the Chairman's comments: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/backpagecoms-knowing-facilitation-of-online-sex-trafficking https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/he... > Our report demonstrates that Backpage has concealed evidence of crimes by systematically deleting words and images suggestive of illegal conduct from advertisements submitted to their website before publishing the ads. And some of those ads involved child sex trafficking. Backpage’s editing process sanitized the content of millions of advertisements and hid important evidence from law enforcement. > This story begins in 2006, when Backpage executives began instructing staff responsible for screening ads (known as “moderators”) to edit the text of adult ads to conceal their true nature. By October 2010, Backpage executives formalized a process of both manual and automated deletion of incriminating words and phrases in ads. > A feature known as the “Strip Term From Ad filter” did most of the work. Backpage CEO Carl Ferrer personally directed his employees to create this electronic filter to “strip”—that is, to delete—hundreds of words indicative of sex trafficking or prostitution from ads before publication. > To be clear, this filter did not reject ads for illegal activity. Backpage executives were afraid that would cut into profits and, in Ferrer’s words, “piss off a lot” of customers. Instead, the Strip Term From Ad filter simply altered ads to conceal signs of illegality. They put profits ahead of vulnerable women and children. The evidence is clear that Backpage deliberately edited out words indicative of child sex trafficking and other crimes from ads. > The list of terms is chilling. Starting in 2010, Backpage automatically deleted words including “lolita,” “teenage,” “rape,” “young,” “little girl,” “teen,” “fresh,” “innocent,” “school girl,” and even “amber alert”—and then published the edited versions of the ads to their website. Backpage also systematically deleted scores of words indicative of prostitution. > Backpage claims their staff reviews ads to avoid child exploitation, but these terms were stripped out before anyone at Backpage even looked at the ad. And when law enforcement officials came asking for more information about suspicious ads—as they routinely did—Backpage had already destroyed the original ad posted by the pimp or trafficker. The evidence was gone.

DanBC 9y ago

> What should I do to validate OP's claims? Listen to Backpage. They don't attempt to deny that they publish these ads. They do claim that the first amendment and the Communications Decency Act mean they're blameless for doing so. The fact that Backpage was telling advertisers how to avoid the filters is also widely accepted. In fact, it's worse: Backpage developed software to automatically change ads before moderating the ads. Watch the video and read the Chairman's comments: https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/hearings/backpagecoms-knowing-facilitation-of-online-sex-trafficking https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/subcommittees/investigations/he... > Our report demonstrates that Backpage has concealed evidence of crimes by systematically deleting words and images suggestive of illegal conduct from advertisements submitted to their website before publishing the ads. And some of those ads involved child sex trafficking. Backpage’s editing process sanitized the content of millions of advertisements and hid important evidence from law enforcement. > This story begins in 2006, when Backpage executives began instructing staff responsible for screening ads (known as “moderators”) to edit the text of adult ads to conceal their true nature. By October 2010, Backpage executives formalized a process of both manual and automated deletion of incriminating words and phrases in ads. > A feature known as the “Strip Term From Ad filter” did most of the work. Backpage CEO Carl Ferrer personally directed his employees to create this electronic filter to “strip”—that is, to delete—hundreds of words indicative of sex trafficking or prostitution from ads before publication. > To be clear, this filter did not reject ads for illegal activity. Backpage executives were afraid that would cut into profits and, in Ferrer’s words, “piss off a lot” of customers. Instead, the Strip Term From Ad filter simply altered ads to conceal signs of illegality. They put profits ahead of vulnerable women and children. The evidence is clear that Backpage deliberately edited out words indicative of child sex trafficking and other crimes from ads. > The list of terms is chilling. Starting in 2010, Backpage automatically deleted words including “lolita,” “teenage,” “rape,” “young,” “little girl,” “teen,” “fresh,” “innocent,” “school girl,” and even “amber alert”—and then published the edited versions of the ads to their website. Backpage also systematically deleted scores of words indicative of prostitution. > Backpage claims their staff reviews ads to avoid child exploitation, but these terms were stripped out before anyone at Backpage even looked at the ad. And when law enforcement officials came asking for more information about suspicious ads—as they routinely did—Backpage had already destroyed the original ad posted by the pimp or trafficker. The evidence was gone.