6 ms·

Backpage Founder's 93 Charges Lack Actual Sex-Trafficking Claims

32 points by Fins 9y ago

drawkbox 9y ago
It was always about censorship and an aside of blocking sex workers/prostitution. The founders have been ad hominem attacked but they are big in civil rights [3], personal freedoms and started the New Times and Village Voice alternative media which is a check on authority [1][2], Backpage was originally the New Times classified section. The government filter/firewall is the authoritarian goal in this journey. Backpage and SESTA/FOSTA are solely about censorship and a step towards the internet filter/firewall [4]. Meanwhile Backpage really only added a filter to block words as any profanity/bad word filter does per direction from the government and lawyers [5]. The Backpage report claims of 'trafficking' amounts to simply a profanity filter that backpage created to PREVENT people posting bad ads or possible 'trafficking' not encouraging it [5]. The report says Backpage 'knowingly concealed evidence of criminality' for removing bad terms being posted due to a profanity/word filter? They didn't want people posting ads with these terms because they were bad words, not that they supported it[5]. That argument is like saying, because a site profanity filter removed racial slurs that the site was 'knowingly concealing evidence of racism'. New Times has been kicking up dust on authoritarianism since the 70s. Lacey and Larkin also won a lawsuit against Arizona as recently as 2013 for false arrest which is still used to attack them [1][7]. They had exposed Sheriff Joe Arpaio's real estate corruption and his home address was in the article and is public information. Arpaio demanded all information on every visitor to the website, the article and previous articles about him for who knows what, they refused and published that and they were arrested for not turning over private user data for merely reading an article about Arpaio [7]. > In December 2013, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors agreed to pay Phoenix New Times founders Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin $3.75 million to settle their false arrest lawsuit against the county defendants. Massive authoritarian overreach is happening on the internet from many sides. When authoritarian overreaches begin, you first go towards censorship, attacking civil rights, alternative media and funders of rights. The crazy thing is they literally had these guys in a jail cell in the courtroom [6] like they were Hannibal Lecter, it feels very authoritarian and a bit scary considering their civil rights / alternative media / anti-war background and they merely ran a website [6]. The money laundering charges are because they tried to move ownership of the site offshore due to authoritarian overreach attacking it [5][6]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_New_Times https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_New_Times [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice_Media [3] http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/ http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/ [4] https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advancing-under-trump/ https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advanci... [5] https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report... [6] http://time.com/5233804/backpage-prostitution-money-laundering-scheme/ http://time.com/5233804/backpage-prostitution-money-launderi... [7] http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/the-incident/ http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/the-incident/
- luckydude 9y ago
  I read some article that claimed that the sex workers are really against the new laws. If I'm to believe the article, there are apparently a bunch of sex workers who weren't forced into the sex trade by some evil person (I think most do it because it is the "easiest" path to making decent money). These workers used craigslist and backpage to have clients contact them and then there is some way they screen the clients (is luckydude some creep or just some normal schmoo who wants his ashes hauled? They network and talk to each other about clients somehow). Now with the internet removed as an easy way to screen these workers are claiming they'll have to work the streets or work with pimps which is far worse. I hadn't really thought about that but I can see it. So perhaps these new laws are not so great. Who would have thought our awesome congress would do that?
  - Fins 9y ago
    Interestingly, it is also apparently quite difficult to find actual trafficking victims, at least in the US.
    - tyingq 9y ago
      Find any local Asian "spa" that caters to men. Not much to do with Backpage, but trafficked humans are all over the US.
      - Fins 9y ago
        Eh, are you equating, ahem, "sexual services providers" with trafficking victims? For some reason, every major prostitution bust catches quite a few working girls and johns, but actual trafficking victims are few and far between. And every time I read about a "massage" parlor bust in a paper, it's always "such and such has been charged with pandering", not "such and such has been rescued from the clutches of Backapge-enabled traffickers". Not to say that it doesn't happen, if there were trafficked sex workers "all over the US", someone would have pointed a few by now. Chances are you'll find them in less public-facing businesses anyway. But busting those doesn't make moral crusaders feel quite as good.
DataWorker 9y ago
And the recent closure of craigslist personals section while keeping the “therapeutic services” section where the actual sex work solicitation occurs is worth consideration also.
- luckydude 9y ago
  I emailed Craig about that and they are gone now.
captain_perl 9y ago
For those unaware of the previous run at Craigslist by several States Attorneys, here's a summary: Questioner: "If you close down this safe forum, workers will just go to another forum." State Attorney: "Then we'll sue them too." So States Attorneys don't see themselves in any way as social workers, just as law enforcement willing to play whack-a-mole forever without regard to the societal cost.
- gowld 9y ago
  States Attorneys's salaries and power depend on a steady crime rate, not reducing crime.

32 points by Fins 9y ago

It was always about censorship and an aside of blocking sex workers/prostitution. The founders have been ad hominem attacked but they are big in civil rights [3], personal freedoms and started the New Times and Village Voice alternative media which is a check on authority [1][2], Backpage was originally the New Times classified section. The government filter/firewall is the authoritarian goal in this journey. Backpage and SESTA/FOSTA are solely about censorship and a step towards the internet filter/firewall [4]. Meanwhile Backpage really only added a filter to block words as any profanity/bad word filter does per direction from the government and lawyers [5]. The Backpage report claims of 'trafficking' amounts to simply a profanity filter that backpage created to PREVENT people posting bad ads or possible 'trafficking' not encouraging it [5]. The report says Backpage 'knowingly concealed evidence of criminality' for removing bad terms being posted due to a profanity/word filter? They didn't want people posting ads with these terms because they were bad words, not that they supported it[5]. That argument is like saying, because a site profanity filter removed racial slurs that the site was 'knowingly concealing evidence of racism'. New Times has been kicking up dust on authoritarianism since the 70s. Lacey and Larkin also won a lawsuit against Arizona as recently as 2013 for false arrest which is still used to attack them [1][7]. They had exposed Sheriff Joe Arpaio's real estate corruption and his home address was in the article and is public information. Arpaio demanded all information on every visitor to the website, the article and previous articles about him for who knows what, they refused and published that and they were arrested for not turning over private user data for merely reading an article about Arpaio [7]. > In December 2013, the Maricopa County Board of Supervisors agreed to pay Phoenix New Times founders Michael Lacey and Jim Larkin $3.75 million to settle their false arrest lawsuit against the county defendants. Massive authoritarian overreach is happening on the internet from many sides. When authoritarian overreaches begin, you first go towards censorship, attacking civil rights, alternative media and funders of rights. The crazy thing is they literally had these guys in a jail cell in the courtroom [6] like they were Hannibal Lecter, it feels very authoritarian and a bit scary considering their civil rights / alternative media / anti-war background and they merely ran a website [6]. The money laundering charges are because they tried to move ownership of the site offshore due to authoritarian overreach attacking it [5][6]. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_New_Times https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix_New_Times [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice_Media https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Village_Voice_Media [3] http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/ http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/ [4] https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advancing-under-trump/ https://www.wired.com/2017/04/internet-censorship-is-advanci... [5] https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report%202017.01.10%20FINAL.pdf https://www.hsgac.senate.gov/imo/media/doc/Backpage%20Report... [6] http://time.com/5233804/backpage-prostitution-money-laundering-scheme/ http://time.com/5233804/backpage-prostitution-money-launderi... [7] http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/the-incident/ http://www.laceyandlarkinfronterafund.org/the-incident/

luckydude 9y ago
I read some article that claimed that the sex workers are really against the new laws. If I'm to believe the article, there are apparently a bunch of sex workers who weren't forced into the sex trade by some evil person (I think most do it because it is the "easiest" path to making decent money). These workers used craigslist and backpage to have clients contact them and then there is some way they screen the clients (is luckydude some creep or just some normal schmoo who wants his ashes hauled? They network and talk to each other about clients somehow). Now with the internet removed as an easy way to screen these workers are claiming they'll have to work the streets or work with pimps which is far worse. I hadn't really thought about that but I can see it. So perhaps these new laws are not so great. Who would have thought our awesome congress would do that?
- Fins 9y ago
  Interestingly, it is also apparently quite difficult to find actual trafficking victims, at least in the US.
  - tyingq 9y ago
    Find any local Asian "spa" that caters to men. Not much to do with Backpage, but trafficked humans are all over the US.
    - Fins 9y ago
      Eh, are you equating, ahem, "sexual services providers" with trafficking victims? For some reason, every major prostitution bust catches quite a few working girls and johns, but actual trafficking victims are few and far between. And every time I read about a "massage" parlor bust in a paper, it's always "such and such has been charged with pandering", not "such and such has been rescued from the clutches of Backapge-enabled traffickers". Not to say that it doesn't happen, if there were trafficked sex workers "all over the US", someone would have pointed a few by now. Chances are you'll find them in less public-facing businesses anyway. But busting those doesn't make moral crusaders feel quite as good.

DataWorker 9y ago

And the recent closure of craigslist personals section while keeping the “therapeutic services” section where the actual sex work solicitation occurs is worth consideration also.

luckydude 9y ago
I emailed Craig about that and they are gone now.

captain_perl 9y ago

For those unaware of the previous run at Craigslist by several States Attorneys, here's a summary: Questioner: "If you close down this safe forum, workers will just go to another forum." State Attorney: "Then we'll sue them too." So States Attorneys don't see themselves in any way as social workers, just as law enforcement willing to play whack-a-mole forever without regard to the societal cost.

gowld 9y ago
States Attorneys's salaries and power depend on a steady crime rate, not reducing crime.