Are we seriously blaming Goldman Sachs of atrocities because it invests in an outstanding alternative news source that also happens to have an adult services classified section? I get emotionally driven, but this is beyond ridiculous.
Most university endowments invest in Sudan as well as in companies that have factories in third-world companies that use child-labor & exploit their workforce. Apple uses sweatshops, GM uses sweatshops...who doesn't use sweatshops? If we condemned every institution that invested in socially exploitative businesses, I doubt any institution would escape being targeted by stone-throwers.
That said...I'm pretty sure that village voice revenue would take less of a cut if exploitative labor were removed from it's advertising sections than if Apple, GM, Samsung, and Backpage were forced to stop using sweat-shop labor. In other words, pretty sure the socially-conscious-investment-board-in-the-sky would give the Village Voice a higher rating than the other three companies I just listed...
Makes me wonder what Kristoff's stock-holdings look like.
It is sad, but there was a non-profit group that wanted to make a list of the top ten socially responsible companies and it could not! Aveda (hair care products) was on it....that was the only one I recognized.
I wonder how accurate this article is? I wonder how much of BackPage is really sex trafficking and under age? Or do they say that to shock you and get a rise out of people in hopes of shutting it down? Or is it mostly willing providers?
This has been going on for a very long time now. It's in the news again due to a large company tied to it. I've never had to show my driver's license or any proof of my age or anything about me to post on Backpage. The website isn't 2257 compliant which makes it very easy for traffickers to advetise on there. There IS a federal law that any media outlet posting erotic pictures is supposed to follow, it's Title 2257 and is all about age verification. If the government enforces this law as strongly as it does in other parts of the adult industry, it could take care of a lot of the trafficking problems. It's good to see one state stepping up and trying to make age verification a requirement. I have no problem with other states doing also. This all, of course, only effects minors. An adult with a valid ID will still be able to be a victim of trafficking. __________________
The only purpose of the article is to shame those involved to stop accepting prostitution ads. If it has an effect, the only effect will be to move the ads somewhere else. It makes people feel good about themselves, like they are doing something, but the net result is nothing at all. If BP started requiring full ID from all advertisers, that would effectively take them out of the business.
Am I the only one who finds it funny that accepting ads for prostitution constitutes "notorious ties to trafficking?" Does that mean that sites that advertise used cars have "notorious ties to auto theft?" Or that amusement parks, which the NYT famously identified as places used frequently by traffickers to exchange kids also have notorious ties to underage trafficking? Or that hotels have notorious ties to prostitution?
Just another shame campaign, neither surprising, nor terribly effective, other than to make Kristoff feel good, get some readers.
Unfortunately it looks like your attempt to purchase VIP membership has failed due to your card being declined. Good news is that we have several other payment options that you could try.
VIP MEMBER
, you are now a VIP member!
We thank you for your purchase!
VIP MEMBER
, Thank you for becoming VIP member!
Membership should be activated shortly. You'll receive notification!
