Let me preface my comments by saying that I think the section 230 protections are overbroad, and have long since passed the level of being a protection against something, and instead has become a shield for some pretty bad business models.

I also think that the “for the children” part is only a guise to deal with the bigger overall issue of prostitution and proximatism (aka pimping).

Okay, so where do we start? Well, let’s consider the idea of availability. Prostitution is generally illegal in the US (with the exception of parts of Nevada, if I remember correctly). After literally centuries of legal bickering and playing games, we have ended up with “escort” and “full body massage” services, and a whole list of secret word games about tipping and being generous and all that sort of stuff, all in the name of dancing around the law.

The internet has clearly improved communication in this field. Online classified ad sites, escort portals and so on are common. They have made prostitution literally something that is easily available at your finger tips, 24 hours per day.

This is the sort of thing that use to be banished to the weekly inkies that nobody read for anything much else except the sex ads. Most major newspapers had long since gotten away from accepting any ads that even suggested the stuff, and many of them don’t even have classified ads anymore anyway. Weekly inkies are a dying breed, in no small part because the sex ads have pretty much left the building.

Now, in the case of CL and others, the sex ads are the only ones they charge for. Why? Because there is plenty of cash money running around over there, and they are willing to pay handsomely for sites that turn a reasonably blind eye towards the content. They make their income in no small part from these ads. New York Time reported in 2010 that CL was taking in more than 30 million a year on sex ads (which CL denied… naturally!).

The real issue though isn’t the money – it’s the availability of information and the ease by which contact is made. Widespread advertising for prostitution, even when gently coded to avoid the law, facilitates the illegal trade, plain and simple.

For the hardcore sex addict, they will find it no matter what. They know locations and they know street corners and they will always find their fix. But the real issue is in making the advertising prevalent and common, you enable people who aren’t adept to enter into that world. On the other side, you make it possible for a pimp to more easily market his wares and to find people willing to pay.

How desperate is Backpage to remain in this business? They have gone to the length of subverting store brand gift cards so people can buy credits for sex ads… https://www.dallasnews.com/news/investigations/2017/07/24/new-trick-sex-trade-pimps-can-buy-ads-dallas-based-backpagecom-retailers-gift-cards

While there is certainly SOME advantage to leaving ads up and trying to play whac-a-mole with thousands of anonymous pimps, the reality is that changing the number of people willing or able to connect and pay for sex changes things dramatically. It’s not an either / or situation. It’s something that should be attacked from both ends.

The problem with attacking it by going after the pimps is that the legal system and case law makes it an incredibly hard job to do. While the police can often “sting” the girls who work openly and arrest them they rarely get the pimps. The girls are generally on a legal revolving door that has them out before the ink is dry on the report.

For the more severe child prostitution issue, those people aren’t going to give it up easily and fall into a police trap just like that. These pimps and groups are well trained and well versed in what they need to do in order to avoid getting arrested, they are careful what they say and careful how they work. Burner phones, drop points, disposible credit cards (or gift cards) and never, ever directly accepting cash for sex – it’s all done to avoid prosecution.

When law enforcement does arrest one, the court process is prolonged, expensive, and one undotted I is enough to kick them loose. Mike, you more than anyone should know from your recent experience that even a simple civil matter can run 6 months without even trying. A criminal case can run years, and hundreds of man hours for the police and the court system to prosecute someone who will be out before the trial is even really over.

Finally, let me say this. The changes to the law appear to be quite narrow in focus. This does not rip up section 230 and throw it in the garbage, it creates a very specific exception for certain types of activities. Section 230 is overly broad and has allowed all sorts of business models that would never make it in the real world. It’s time to stop at least this very specific abuse. Section 230 does matter, but so do the lives of the victims here.