Write Review
2,075,057 Total Reviews 3,665 New Reviews
13,944 Users Online

Washington DC

News: State Attorney Generals ask Backpage to explain handling of escort ads
DrunkNews 1177 reads
posted

Not sure where I stand but sounds like a reasonable move by the AG if it does help curb trafficking of innocent girls without hindering the business of legitimate providers.  However, apparently a big name news site like the one this article is from must not check for correct spelling or grammar anymore? I 'highlighted' them in brackets [] LMAO ;)


State AGs ask Backpage to explain handling of escort ads
By:(some writer) | 08/31/11 2:49 PM


Attorneys general from 45 states — including Maryland and Virginia — are asking an online classified ad site to explain how it handles advertisements that the lawyers say facilitate prostitution and sex trafficking.

The attorney[s] general[] wrote in a letter to Backpage.com on Wednesday that the site's purported efforts to curb such advertisements "have proven ineffective."

The site said last fall that it was [supending] some areas of its personals and adult advertising sections. But the attorneys' letter argues that Backpage is still a "hub" for prostitution and sex-trafficking.

"The prominence of illegal content on Backpage.com conflicts with the company's representations about its content policies," the letter reads. The letter asks the site to explain its criteria for determining whether an ad involves illegal activity, how it screens [adds][no comma here?] and how many ads have been reviewed and rejected.

Maryland Attorney General (some hot shot attorney) and Virginia Attorney General (another hot shot  attorney) both signed the letter.

The attorneys say they have found more than 50 cases in 22 states in which charges were filed against people trafficking minors on Backpage, or attempting to do so.

Some of those cases have occurred in the D.C. region. A Wheaton mall security guard was accused of pimping teenage girls by creating ads for his escort business on Backpage and other sites. And three people charged in a Maryland sex trafficking case were accused of posting [explict] pictures of a teen girl on the site and pimping her for sex.

Claudius42310560 reads

Here's a list of the ones that are actually OK or are disputable.

The plural of attorney general IS attorneys general. So the article is correct.

The comma usage style "sub-clause1, sub-clause2, and sub-clause3" is conventional and correct but print media often observe a different style: "sub-clause1, sub-clause2 and sub-clause3". The last comma is omitted. In general journalist are more sparing with use of punctuation.

There is nothing wrong with the use of "explicit" in the article.

ReplyQuoteReport
DrunkNews419 reads

But as for "explicit", of course there's nothing wrong except it was spelled "explict" or something like that in the article.  Or maybe I pressed the wrong button and whacked a letter somewhere. lol

ReplyQuoteReport
Claudius42310494 reads

although i know the rules fairly well, i am a crappy proof reader. my brain often corrects what my eyes see. so i missed the missing 'i'. ah well.... i'm old, blind, and cranky.....

the thing with the Attorneys General is that the noun is Attorney and General is in this case an adjective modifying the noun. Hence the captains courageous example.

One would correctly say: The captains courageous rounded Cape Horn in a storm. But it is incorrect to put it as: The captain courageouses.....

In the AG case the attorney is the general attorney for the state.





ReplyQuoteReport
CottonBalls272 reads


ReplyQuoteReport
DrunkNews568 reads

nope it's actually my first.

But how come no one's commenting on the content of the article? This thread is turning into a joke about spelling/grammar about the article rather than about back-page ads. lmao
I guess it was my fault. lol

ReplyQuoteReport
nonveritas355 reads

Technically, Attorneys General is correct and Attorney Generals is not.  But . . . language evolves, as unfortunate as that is.  And it's evolving in the direction (which I think is deplorable but the tide is inexorable) of referring to Attorneys General as "General," as in "General Holder" (the current U.S. Attorney General, head of the Department of Supposed Justice).  So, logically, if the General in Attorney General is evolving from an adjective to a noun, it should be proper to render the plural by adding an "s" to the noun phrase -- hence, Attorney Generals.

For the record, I deplore all of the evolution that has occurred in the English language since 1616 -- the year of Shakespeare's death.  (And all new music since 1827 -- the first year in which Bach, Mozart, and Beethoven all were dead.)

If any of the lovely providers out there who read this want to spend an hour with an intellectual, please free fee to contact me.  Remember -- the brain is the body's largest erogenous zone.

ReplyQuoteReport
joelrick741 reads

By BP explaining how they handle escort ads, it will expose itself to criminal charges or civil liability. Whatever course of action these AGs want to take just know that the end is to shutdown the escort page. The charges of trafficking are strawmen presented to the public so that there will be support for their offices pursuit of these cases. Give these people an inch they will turn it into a mile.

ReplyQuoteReport
Post Reply Back To Forum
Register Now!