I posted the blog below on our site and was wondering whether anybody here had any further insights or views on this topic. Thanks, editor, My Red Light Story.
The Backpage Controversy
The controversy over Backpage allowing prostitution ads exploded into view last month when Nicholas Kristoff, op-ed columnist of the New York Times and frequent writer about trafficking, published a column, "How Pimps Use the Web to Sell Girls." I found the column unnecessarily alarming and unbalanced on a factual basis, as I'll explain. What I find really lacking, however, is a proper discussion of the underlying moral and cultural issues. For example, what about all the sex workers working on a consensual basis who might actually be safer because of avenues such as Backpage?
Is it possible that society is actually better off with services such as this than without? Those questions, however, are more complicated, so some of the facts first. Kristoff said in his column, "The episode also shines a spotlight on how the girl was marketed - in ads on Backpage.com, a major national Web site where people place ads to sell all kinds of things, including sex. It is a godsend to pimps, allowing customers to order a girl online as if she were a pizza."
He goes on to say that attorney generals had identified 22 states in which pimps had used Backpage to market underage girls. He concludes that Backpage has resisted taking down prostitution ads because these generate a lot of revenue for the company, mentioning $22 million annually.
It's easy to conclude from this that the attorney generals might be correct in applying pressure on Backpage to stop this business, at least until one gets some more facts, such as the ones that appeared in a Forbes column the following day titled, "Backpage Takes Heat, But Prostitution Ads Are Everywhere." Forbes points out that all ads on Backpage require payment by credit card, free personals included, and that Backpage responds immediately to subpoenas for information. The Forbes columnist says that a Backpage executive told him that Backpage has 123 moderators checking the ads for what might be underage prostitution.
In other words, if you were a trafficker or pimp coercing women, the quickest and stupidest way of getting caught would be to post ads on Backpage, especially with underage women. That doesn't mean it doesn't happen, since abuse has apparently been documented. Overall it seems like the instances of abuse are being blown out of proportion. Sex trafficking is a global problem, but is Backpage really the place where these women are predominantly sold? I don't have the definitive answer to that but I suspect the answer is no. It is, however, a visible and increasingly "high-profile" target, and so law enforcement can target it and make it seem like they are making strides against trafficking. Just like when they pressured Craigslist to stop their prostitution ads, to no real actual effect since those ads persist, albeit more discretely.
Forbes further stated, "… it's also the online equivalent of a European red-light district, contained and easily monitored by the police," to which the attorney general McKenna said in a follow-up statement, "... police directly involved in rescuing women and girls from pimps are overwhelmingly opposed to such sites." I guess if you're focused just on removing possible avenues for abusive pimps, this makes sense. But it ignores all the workers operating consensually.
I know a number of escorts who mostly use escort review boards or escort promotional sites for marketing themselves, but they do also occasionally post on Backpage for additional business. It's not their top choice because they tend to be contacted by either less experienced or flaky clients. The degree of protection is nowhere near as high as on review boards on which clients themselves can establish "safe" reputations.
The real benefit of services such as Backpage is that it provides a safer avenue for sex workers than alternatives such as street walking. Using Backpage, a sex worker can spend some time talking to a client on the telephone and develop some sense of the client. The worker can also ask for references (other workers the client has seen), and can verify that the client is safe. None of this is possible on the street. Still, Backpage is a fairly dangerous place for both clients and providers. Any experienced person on either side will prefer the review boards that have much more sophisticated means for both client and provider to learn about each other before meeting while still retaining anonymity. Backpage can, however, serve as a stepping stone to these.
According to comments I've seen in escort forum discussions, there are a lot of pimps that use Backpage. How much of this involves coercion is impossible to tell. What percentage of the consensual liaisons negotiated using Backpage involves pimps is also impossible to tell. Bottom line, Backpage is a rough, anything-can-happen environment for both clients and sex workers. I do believe it's still safer than street walking, but it's far from ideal.
Are sex workers better off for having Backpage available? Is society better off? One way of answering this difficult question would be to try to quantify, or at least estimate, how much harmful activity there is versus harmless. I expect the harmless and consensual levels would outweigh the harmful levels. This approach would obviously be unacceptable to anybody who is morally opposed to prostitution, but it makes sense if you accept prostitution as inevitable, and in some ways natural, and my expectation is that it would show that overall, services like Backpage do more good than harm.
(If anybody has any information or comments that might help answer the questions this blog poses, please let me know and I will give them visibility.)