Yes, I did, and I find the article very disingenous, biased, and intentionally confused (it mixes different problems in other to make the point). Considering t

Yes, I did, and I find the article very disingenous, biased, and intentionally confused (it mixes different problems in other to make the point). Considering that porn simulates reality (to various degrees), touching somebody else's eye doesn't prove anything. Also a title "very young teen" doesn't prove anything (it's pretty much standard for videos of this genre). If you want to find abusive videos, you can also find them on YouTube, which has been criticized as well, for the same reasons. The legal/moral issue is how the hosting company handles them. The author of the article mentions a low report rate, but he did not investigate the possibility that PornHub makes reporting difficult or ineffective. Ultimately, the article is intentionally ideological, and not factual, because a real investigation may hurt the point. Here's how disconnected from reality the author is: > The problem goes far beyond one company. Indeed, a rival of Pornhub, XVideos, which arguably has even fewer scruples, may attract more visitors. Depictions of child abuse also appear on mainstream sites like Twitter, Reddit and Facebook. And Google supports the business models of companies that thrive on child molestation.