[HN Gopher] Craigslist Shuts Down Personals Section After Congre...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Craigslist Shuts Down Personals Section After Congress Pass Bill on
       Trafficking (2018)
        
       Author : evo_9
       Score  : 31 points
       Date   : 2021-11-02 20:50 UTC (2 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.npr.org)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.npr.org)
        
       | dokem wrote:
       | Isn't human trafficking just used as a scary term for what is
       | basically 'willful prostitution' in contexts like this? I highly
       | doubt Craigslist is systematically used to sell slaves or
       | anything truly nefarious given how public and easily monitor-able
       | it is.
        
       | vmception wrote:
       | Basically the threat of civil and criminal liability has prompted
       | many sites to remove their human connection services, and others
       | to police them more actively and pre-emptively instead of taking
       | a completely "not our problem" approach
       | 
       | This seems to be the stated goal of the bill, at the expense of
       | many people.
       | 
       | Has there been any cases or challenge of FOSTA and SESTA laws?
        
         | jimbob45 wrote:
         | Edit: I stand corrected. Dragonwriter is absolutely right that
         | the bill had bipartisan support (even the holdouts were
         | perfectly bipartisan).
        
           | jdavis703 wrote:
           | The current Democratic VP has bragged about voting for the
           | law for what it's worth. Being "tough on crime" and promoting
           | sexual puritanism are bipartisan interests.
        
           | dragonwriter wrote:
           | > Everyone blamed it on Republican overreach at the time
           | 
           | No they didn't.
           | 
           | > and yet the Democrats haven't moved to revoke the law.
           | 
           | It passed the House 388-25 and the Senate 97-2. It had
           | overwhelming support in both parties.
        
       | cm2012 wrote:
       | I wonder how much escort work happens through Tinder
        
       | ChrisArchitect wrote:
       | anything new here since 2018?
       | 
       | Previous discussion from when this was news:
       | 
       | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16654698
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | 1cvmask wrote:
       | Jeffrey Epstein and his powerful friends never needed the
       | Internet for trafficking.
        
       | encryptluks2 wrote:
       | I personally think them removing the personals section was a bit
       | silly. It is like Facebook saying, we are going to remove our
       | messenger feature because people could use it to chat about
       | illegal stuff. Or Google saying, we are going to remove our cloud
       | storage because people could host illegal stuff.
        
         | jdavis703 wrote:
         | It was pretty clear the Congresspeople were specifically
         | targeting online classifieds like Backpage and Craigslist (even
         | though the law itself is vague enough to target any website
         | operator). I don't blame Craigslist for not wanting to face off
         | with the Department of Justice and spend years dealing with
         | negative PR about how they're enabling sex trafficking.
        
           | encryptluks2 wrote:
           | I think they saw them as easy targets to pretend like they
           | are being productive. Sex trafficking happens on Facebook,
           | Instagram, Twitter, etc. but they aren't shutting down. The
           | best way to prevent sex trafficking is investing in free and
           | better education, improving resources for the poor, and
           | providing health services and counseling.
        
         | [deleted]
        
         | anyfactor wrote:
         | Well, didn't some people accuse Wish of facilitating human
         | trafficing through listing over-priced cabinets?
        
           | newbie789 wrote:
           | That was Wayfair IIRC
        
       | harles wrote:
       | This should be dated 2018 in the title. Very old news in tech
       | terms.
        
         | vmception wrote:
         | But a good time to revisit FOSTA/SESTA to see if those laws are
         | worth it
        
           | tyingq wrote:
           | If it's lucrative, the listings don't go away. They just end
           | up on sites that are out of reach of FOSTA/SESTA.
        
           | floatingatoll wrote:
           | And then to post a _relevant_ link about it.
        
           | heavyset_go wrote:
           | Agreed. I've noticed an uptick of what appears to be sex
           | workers on dating apps. Surely some of them were trafficked,
           | just like some were on Craiglist.
           | 
           | I'm not sure why Craiglist personals weren't okay, but the
           | same exact thing on Tinder or Bumble is.
        
             | _jal wrote:
             | Craigslist felt at risk of being targeted the same way
             | Backpage was.
             | 
             | Not wishing to go to jail, they chose to remove anything
             | that could possibly be used against them.
        
               | dragonwriter wrote:
               | > Craigslist felt at risk of being targeted the same way
               | Backpage was.
               | 
               | Craigslist _had already been targeted_ multiple times by
               | law enforcement, and had revised the structure and
               | policies of their personals sections multiple times to
               | try to stop that. SESTA /FOSTA was when they gave up
               | trying to find a way to make it work, but it wasn't just
               | the Backpage example.
        
             | cowmoo728 wrote:
             | Take a look at the #fmty (fly me to you) hashtag on twitter
             | someday. Twitter has become an open market for adult
             | services.
        
             | vmception wrote:
             | Its all about the liability they are willing to assume.
             | Dont confuse that with the law itself.
             | 
             | Its the same about wondering why one person gets culturally
             | "cancelled" and another doesn't for the same action: The
             | people beside them have a large enough rainy day fund and
             | don't mind the risk. It says nothing about what the culture
             | actually believes either way, only the risk tolerance of
             | the wealthy backers. Huh, reminds me of the princeton study
             | that said the same thing about progressive laws that get
             | passed, where the culture has no effect on anything except
             | that sometimes it coincidentally matches what wealthy
             | special interests were already doing, with the caveat that
             | its more of a direct democracy for the wealthy special
             | interests but an additional level of representative
             | democracy for everyone else.
        
             | jdavis703 wrote:
             | Banning all dating services would have immediate public
             | backlash. SESTA/FOSTA really only caused a stir among
             | people who care about sex work or tech freedom/privacy.
             | There was very little mainstream media coverage of it, and
             | the little there was took a heavy slant to the anti-sex
             | trafficking angle.
        
           | _jal wrote:
           | It is. Techdirt has been excellent at tracking this stuff, as
           | they do:
           | 
           | https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20210728/13245147264/enoug.
           | ..
           | 
           | The short version: it is pretty obvious that it did what the
           | people pushing it wanted it to do, but it did not do what
           | they said it would do. They continue to lie about it in
           | multiple ways.
           | 
           | The same actors are currently targeting payment processors in
           | their continued attempts to conflate and ban prostitution,
           | trafficking, pornography, nudity and frequently sex education
           | wherever they can.
           | 
           | https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20211008/17285147720/prudi.
           | ..
        
         | _trampeltier wrote:
         | Now in 2021 we can see what changed. Do we live now in a so
         | much safer world?
        
           | tata71 wrote:
           | No, now we just have a bunch of mixed signals in the rooms
           | for rent section....
        
           | paulgb wrote:
           | > Law enforcement officials say that it is sometimes more
           | difficult to track traffickers, because the law pushed them
           | further underground. Advocates say that sex workers now face
           | higher safety risks. The removal of sites advertising sex
           | hinders their ability to vet their clients, the advocates
           | say, and is pushing more of them onto the streets.
           | 
           | From Stamping Out Online Sex Trafficking May Have Pushed It
           | Underground (Dec 2019)
           | 
           | https://www.nytimes.com/2019/12/17/technology/fosta-sex-
           | traf...
        
           | fennecfoxen wrote:
           | No. Backpage, in its dealings with law enforcement, operated
           | as a model of cooperation, transparency, and proactive
           | outreach in these matters, and received plaudits from
           | multiple law enforcement agencies for this. Its availability
           | also made it more difficult for pimps and organized crime to
           | monopolize the trade in a region, as they exploited or even
           | trafficked women.
           | 
           | When it was shut down and seized and its founders prosecuted,
           | it was a win for the DoJ PR department and for dangerous sex
           | traffickers, and a loss for the rest of the world.
           | 
           | I'm morally against all of this myself in principle, but you
           | can't just endorse prohibition without considering the
           | consequences: even if all this is bad you can't just say
           | "this is bad!!" as an excuse for _making it significantly
           | worse_ as you lie to the public and slander the operators.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2021-11-02 23:02 UTC)