More People Realizing That SESTA Will Do A Lot More Harm Than Good

from the it's-a-problem dept

At this point, it seems fairly clear that Congress simply does not care that SESTA is going to do an awful lot of harm for almost no benefit at all, and is rushing towards a Senate vote. But more and more people outside of Congress are recognizing the problems that it will cause. While all of the supporters of the bill are insisting they're doing it to "protect" victims of sex trafficking, as we've explained SESTA will almost certainly make their lives worse -- putting them at much more risk while doing little to nothing to stop actual trafficking. The Daily Dot has a good article talking to advocates for victims of sex trafficking and sex workers, talking about the damage SESTA will cause:

In her 40 years of involvement with the industry—formerly as a trafficking victim, a consensual sex worker, and currently as an advocate and outreach provider—DiAngelo has seen many similar efforts by the government and law enforcement to crack down on the establishments and platforms sex workers use to secure clients. Every time, she explains, the end result is the same.

“When you take away a worker’s available options, they have to drop down to the next-best available option. Nobody thinks about that,” DiAngelo says. “But we don’t disappear because they get rid of our work. Our food disappears, our security, our housing … our safety, that disappears, but we don’t and our need for services definitely doesn’t disappear.” Those things, she says, only grow.

Finding work from an ad posted on the internet means there’s a documented trail linking a sex worker and the client; it means the sex worker has the time to do due diligence, checking in with the client’s references and consulting a community of peers to determine whether or not this person is safe. When those sites shut down, as they periodically do, sex workers look elsewhere for clients—most often, on the street.

And that leads to much more dangerous situations:

Fearful of arrest, sex workers move off main streets and into areas where they’re more difficult to spot. Under pressure to make money, they have less time to assess the situation at hand, leaving them vulnerable to violent predators and, indeed, traffickers with a penchant for exploiting people in desperate situations. When sites like RedBook and Backpage shut down, “the life of the trafficker does not change at all,” DiAngelo says. “They still have their product, which is the victim.”

So again, it's unclear why people think that attacking the platforms (and not the actual traffickers) will help the victims at all.

Meanwhile, following the lead of the Wall Street Journal, the LA Times has released an editorial detailing what a disaster SESTA is and how much harm it will do:

The internet has been a tremendous force for good in the world, creating untold opportunities to connect, communicate, learn, create and make a living. But many of the properties of the net that make good things possible also enable less desirable pursuits, and even evil ones, on a vast scale. Congress is now focused on one of the worst of those pursuits: sex trafficking. It's taking particular aim at websites like Backpage.com that run ads for prostitutes, some of whom have been shown to be underage or adults who are effectively enslaved. But in their efforts to give prosecutors and victims more power in court, lawmakers are poised to weaken a legal protection that has helped produce much of what's good about the net.

The LA Times piece, as did the WSJ piece, also notes that Backpage -- the site that backers of the bill admitted they're targeting, despite the fact that it has already shut down its adult ads section -- still faces two big legal challenges that will show the site is not immune under CDA 230:

The irony is that, as a Senate investigation last year contended, Backpage may not be entitled to immunity under Section 230. It's now facing a Justice Department investigation and a renewed lawsuit by trafficking victims in Boston. If Congress simply cannot wait to see how those cases turn out, there is a middle ground — it could give state attorneys general clearer authority to go after websites that violate federal sex trafficking laws. But if it insists on carving out a bigger hole in Section 230 to battle sex trafficking, it's only a matter of time before it comes under pressure to address another evil, and then another, and then another. And before you know it, there will be nothing left of Section 230.

It really is a big question that no one in Congress seems to want to answer. Why can't Congress wait to see if either the DOJ or the court in Boston can get to Backpage -- because if they can, then there's really no argument for SESTA at all (and, as noted in the first half of this post, it's not clear what the argument is for SESTA anyway). However, in talking to people on the Hill, it appears the general opinion of our lawmakers is that they don't really care if the bill doesn't do anything good. They really want to claim they've "done something" and "going after sex trafficking" (even if it will actually make the problem worse) leads to good headlines. Also, the impression I've gotten is they're sick of people arguing about how bad this bill will be, so they want to pass it just to get it off their plates -- which seems like a bad way to make laws to me. But what do I know?


Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread


  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 8:47am

    as is the usual case, the politicians voting this law and others in do so without actually checking to find out if the result will match the intention. the biggest reason being THOSE POLITICIANS ARE NOT AFFECTED BY THE RESULTS AND THEREFORE DO NOT GIVE A MONKEY'S TOSS! the desired effect for them is that it makes out that they have done something, regardless of what happens and have justified their position and can try to use it to go for the vote next time around! typical of all self-serving assholes who are only interested in themselves and NOT in the people they are supposed to represent!!

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 8:55am

    Google/Facebook: *crickets*

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 9:13am

    Are there not two separate issues here?
    Why go after prostitution when your target is trafficking?
    Something does not add up.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 9:20am

      Re:

      Because actually going after the source of the problem might result in the problem actual being solved, which would take away one of the bogeymen these people depend on to continue pushing idiotic bills.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 9:18am

    It does not matter how many people realize it.

    All that matters is what the copyright industry wants.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Rekrul, 8 Mar 2018 @ 10:12am

    It really is a big question that no one in Congress seems to want to answer. Why can't Congress wait to see if either the DOJ or the court in Boston can get to Backpage -- because if they can, then there's really no argument for SESTA at all

    Because of this right here;

    "But if it insists on carving out a bigger hole in Section 230 to battle sex trafficking, it's only a matter of time before it comes under pressure to address another evil, and then another, and then another. And before you know it, there will be nothing left of Section 230."

    Once they have one exception, they can add more until there's no more safe harbor left, allowing for widespread censorship of any information the government doesn't like.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 10:20am

    I was for it before I was against it. We all know what the world's oldest profession is, regardless of what we are told.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • identicon
    Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 10:53am

    So again, it's unclear why people think that attacking the platforms (and not the actual traffickers) will help the victims at all.

    I can't imagine why you're assuming they do.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    ECA (profile), 8 Mar 2018 @ 11:02am

    Why is it?

    That I feel a Small group is PUSHING THINGS into our gov. that have to right/reason/since to be??
    How long has it been that a Rep has ASKED US, what we want?

    How easy would it be, as a group/corp/agency to (Kinda) fake information??
    Use a pile of Fake/real names, addresses, Letters, Posts, Emails, and DROP THEM on to a Rep and say "???????" this needs to be done/fixed..
    It would be easier/cheaper then REALLY ASKING PEOPLE, when we think EVERYONE would like this to happen...(without asking us)

    I wonder if there are agencies that could DO IT FOR US..

    (its been done in the past, its been done recently, and it can STILL be done)

    How much time does it take to Validate Information, thats handed to you from a CORP/Agency/religious group/....

    They did the work, WHY should we bother, is NOT a good attitude WE WANT..

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • identicon
      Anonymous Coward, 8 Mar 2018 @ 11:47am

      Re: Why is it?

      What you're describing is exactly why the FCC is being sued by over a dozen states because of the fake comments posted on their website over the past several years. Providing knowingly false information to the government, or the government acting upon information without making a good faith effort of verifying it, can be illegal in many circumstances.

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Ninja (profile), 9 Mar 2018 @ 4:07am

    It's like when they do things for the children that actually hurt the children.

    "We are adults, we know what we are doing, we don't need to listen to lowly kids..."

    Yeah.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    Jeff Rivett (profile), 9 Mar 2018 @ 4:37am

    It's easier to understand SESTA from the point of view of legislators and their friends. From their perspective, the main problem with prostitution and sex trafficking is when it's visible: on the streets, in various publications, and on web sites. They apply pressure on law enforcement to push sex workers off the main sreets, and push for laws that prevent sex-related ads from appearing in publications and on web sites that they visit. If they can't see it, it's not a problem.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    restless94110 (profile), 9 Mar 2018 @ 6:33am

    The root of all the harm done by SESTA is he false labeling of prostitution as sex trafficking. That one lie underpins SESTA. Failure to deal with that root problem is why all of these ridiculous articles written here are ineffetual.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  • icon
    NeghVar (profile), 9 Mar 2018 @ 7:09am

    Swatting 2.0

    Have a grudge against a website? Want them taken down? Make a post containing info on sex trafficking or worst yet child porn them report it to the authorities with a screenshot.

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Use markdown for basic formatting. HTML is no longer supported.
  Save me a cookie
Follow Techdirt
Techdirt Gear
Show Now: Takedown
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Advertisement
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads

Close

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.