Sugar Babies
Shemales

Author Topic: Sunday Times on UK brothels & AdultWork  (Read 1981 times)

Offline Horizontal pleasures

Google and Facebook among giants ‘making profits’ from pop‑up brothels

External Link/Members Only

BackPage is a major issue, also AW specifically mentioned near the end of this long article.

55 online comments after the article

No 10 considers new laws on sex trafficking

March 4 2018, 12:01am, The Sunday Times
Web companies have become the “key enabler” for sexual exploitation of trafficked women, according to the National Crime Agency

Internet giants were accused of profiting from sex trafficking in Britain last night as security chiefs warned of a new wave of “pop-up brothels” sweeping the country.

The National Crime Agency (NCA) last night accused firms such as Google and Facebook of “making profits” from the trafficking of vulner­able women, many of whom end up in temporary sex clubs and massage parlours that have sprung up around the country.

The agency’s “modern slavery tsar” said web companies have become the “key enabler for the sexual exploitation of trafficked victims in the UK” and demanded action.

“Pop-up” sex clubs have been discovered in Cornwall, Cambridge, Swindon and holiday cot­tages in the Peak District, which recently enraged the Bishop of Derby, Alastair Redfern.

The Sunday Times also found three such clubs operating last week in luxury flats near Hyde Park, central London.

Theresa May was briefed on the growth of online sex trafficking on Wednesday at a meeting of the modern slavery taskforce — established by the prime minister.

Last night senior government sources said ministers are considering new laws to make internet giants such as Google and Facebook liable when human traffickers use their sites to “pimp” their victims to potential clients.

Downing Street officials said that May and Matt Hancock, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, are examining landmark legislation being passed in America that for the first time would make technology firms and social media giants responsible if they publish content that leads to trafficking.

In a statement issued by Downing Street, May said: “Modern slavery destroys the lives of some of the most vulnerable in our society. All too often we see criminal gangs coerce people with false promises of a better life, only to treat their victims as commodities for sexual exploitation.

“As the hosts of user-generated content, internet companies can and should be doing more to ­prevent trafficking-related material from appearing on their platforms.”

Will Kerr, the NCA’s head of vulnera­bilities, said: “People are using the internet and social media sites to enable sexual exploitation and trafficking.

“It is clear that the internet platforms which host and make a profit out of this type of material need to do more to identify and stop these forms of exploitation.”

The US laws, which were resisted for months by the Internet Association, an organisation funded by Google, Facebook and others, will overturn more than 20 years of blanket immunity afforded to web companies that profit from criminality on their sites.

It means that if people advertise the services of trafficked women and children and clients find them using Google or Facebook, the tech giants could be criminally liable.

The legislation, which is ex­pected to pass through the Senate shortly, makes firms liable if they “knowingly assist, support or facilitate” content that leads to trafficking. It was brought in ­specifically in response to Backpage.com, which has been labelled a “hub of human trafficking, especially the trafficking of minors”.

Last week the UK version of the listings site was still hosting hundreds of explicit postings for sexual services in Britain. Many were also cross-listed on Facebook.

The tech giants have spent millions on lobbyists to water down and delay the new US internet regula­tions in the name of free speech. Facebook and other web companies backed down late last year and agreed with amendments to the legislation, although Google still believes that Backpage.com should be targeted with the existing laws.

This weekend senior sources in both Downing Street and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said they are “looking at” whether and how to replicate the action in the UK, but pointed out that this can be done only when it leaves the EU in March 2019. A Downing Street source said: “We are looking at this. The prime minister has made clear that Brexit gives us opportunities and one of the areas where we might diverge from EU rules is in the digital arena.”

Some cases involving traffickers’ use of internet sites to commit their crimes have recently passed through the UK courts.

Last May David Archer was jailed for 13 years for running a £16m prostitution empire using an adult website that can be accessed via Google and Facebook.

The Essex property tycoon trafficked “vulnerable” women into the UK and put them to work in a string of hotels and brothels.

Their services were advertised on a website called AdultWork, which is freely available on Google and has a community page on Facebook that features scantily clad photographs of women.

This weekend a Westminster council taskforce revealed that it had uncovered three luxury flats in the London borough being used as “pop-up brothels”. Investigators found that the properties were booked and advertised to clients using websites.

It is understood that Google does not profit from AdultWork as it has a zero-tolerance policy for adverts that promote escort services and prostitution.

Facebook said it welcomed the new US legislation.


Offline Students Notebook

Thanks VW, I was reading the article in the Sunday Times and I thought I would look on UKP to see what reaction there had been.

I was interested/ amused by this line -

"It is understood that Google does not profit from AdultWork as it has a zero-tolerance policy for adverts that promote escort services and prostitution "

S.N.



Offline Students Notebook

What do you mean VW ?

I was thanking you for the post, not necessarily for the content of the  article.

S.N.  :unknown:

Barry Shipton

  • Guest
S.N. did you mean that?
HP
Sure he meant HP not VW!  :D

Thanks for posting - spotted the headline this morning, this is part of the Government building up for a crackdown on the likes of AW, Backpage and Vivastreet I suspect.

See Admin’s views on the growing restrictions in this thread:
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=186731.msg1952769#msg1952769

And I posted just after a link to a story which hinted at this - but this gives a lot more detail. Part of that mood shift of ‘if it could be used for trafficking then let’s ban it’. And which MPs are going to defend it and the non trafficked escorts who rely on it for business?

Offline smiths

Google and Facebook among giants ‘making profits’ from pop‑up brothels

External Link/Members Only

BackPage is a major issue, also AW specifically mentioned near the end of this long article.

55 online comments after the article

No 10 considers new laws on sex trafficking

March 4 2018, 12:01am, The Sunday Times
Web companies have become the “key enabler” for sexual exploitation of trafficked women, according to the National Crime Agency

Internet giants were accused of profiting from sex trafficking in Britain last night as security chiefs warned of a new wave of “pop-up brothels” sweeping the country.

The National Crime Agency (NCA) last night accused firms such as Google and Facebook of “making profits” from the trafficking of vulner­able women, many of whom end up in temporary sex clubs and massage parlours that have sprung up around the country.

The agency’s “modern slavery tsar” said web companies have become the “key enabler for the sexual exploitation of trafficked victims in the UK” and demanded action.

“Pop-up” sex clubs have been discovered in Cornwall, Cambridge, Swindon and holiday cot­tages in the Peak District, which recently enraged the Bishop of Derby, Alastair Redfern.

The Sunday Times also found three such clubs operating last week in luxury flats near Hyde Park, central London.

Theresa May was briefed on the growth of online sex trafficking on Wednesday at a meeting of the modern slavery taskforce — established by the prime minister.

Last night senior government sources said ministers are considering new laws to make internet giants such as Google and Facebook liable when human traffickers use their sites to “pimp” their victims to potential clients.

Downing Street officials said that May and Matt Hancock, the secretary of state for digital, culture, media and sport, are examining landmark legislation being passed in America that for the first time would make technology firms and social media giants responsible if they publish content that leads to trafficking.

In a statement issued by Downing Street, May said: “Modern slavery destroys the lives of some of the most vulnerable in our society. All too often we see criminal gangs coerce people with false promises of a better life, only to treat their victims as commodities for sexual exploitation.

“As the hosts of user-generated content, internet companies can and should be doing more to ­prevent trafficking-related material from appearing on their platforms.”

Will Kerr, the NCA’s head of vulnera­bilities, said: “People are using the internet and social media sites to enable sexual exploitation and trafficking.

“It is clear that the internet platforms which host and make a profit out of this type of material need to do more to identify and stop these forms of exploitation.”

The US laws, which were resisted for months by the Internet Association, an organisation funded by Google, Facebook and others, will overturn more than 20 years of blanket immunity afforded to web companies that profit from criminality on their sites.

It means that if people advertise the services of trafficked women and children and clients find them using Google or Facebook, the tech giants could be criminally liable.

The legislation, which is ex­pected to pass through the Senate shortly, makes firms liable if they “knowingly assist, support or facilitate” content that leads to trafficking. It was brought in ­specifically in response to Backpage.com, which has been labelled a “hub of human trafficking, especially the trafficking of minors”.

Last week the UK version of the listings site was still hosting hundreds of explicit postings for sexual services in Britain. Many were also cross-listed on Facebook.

The tech giants have spent millions on lobbyists to water down and delay the new US internet regula­tions in the name of free speech. Facebook and other web companies backed down late last year and agreed with amendments to the legislation, although Google still believes that Backpage.com should be targeted with the existing laws.

This weekend senior sources in both Downing Street and the Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport said they are “looking at” whether and how to replicate the action in the UK, but pointed out that this can be done only when it leaves the EU in March 2019. A Downing Street source said: “We are looking at this. The prime minister has made clear that Brexit gives us opportunities and one of the areas where we might diverge from EU rules is in the digital arena.”

Some cases involving traffickers’ use of internet sites to commit their crimes have recently passed through the UK courts.

Last May David Archer was jailed for 13 years for running a £16m prostitution empire using an adult website that can be accessed via Google and Facebook.

The Essex property tycoon trafficked “vulnerable” women into the UK and put them to work in a string of hotels and brothels.

Their services were advertised on a website called AdultWork, which is freely available on Google and has a community page on Facebook that features scantily clad photographs of women.

This weekend a Westminster council taskforce revealed that it had uncovered three luxury flats in the London borough being used as “pop-up brothels”. Investigators found that the properties were booked and advertised to clients using websites.

It is understood that Google does not profit from AdultWork as it has a zero-tolerance policy for adverts that promote escort services and prostitution.

Facebook said it welcomed the new US legislation.

Kevin Hyland the slavery tsar is a very long term opponent of punting, as a policeman in London he was often involved in raids that resulted in very little. He is a fully paid up member of the same ilk as Harman and Bindel, he will twist the facts to suit his anti-agenda. :thumbsdown:

Obviously actual trafficking for sex when proved in court needs stamping out with mandatory life sentences given to those convicted in my view.

Offline smiths

What do you mean VW ?

I was thanking you for the post, not necessarily for the content of the  article.

S.N.  :unknown:

Wakey wakey. :rolleyes: The OP of the thread was HP not VW.

MarcT

  • Guest
For those who have not heard of the Archer case:

External Link/Members Only


Offline smiths

Sure he meant HP not VW!  :D

Thanks for posting - spotted the headline this morning, this is part of the Government building up for a crackdown on the likes of AW, Backpage and Vivastreet I suspect.

See Admin’s views on the growing restrictions in this thread:
https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=186731.msg1952769#msg1952769

And I posted just after a link to a story which hinted at this - but this gives a lot more detail. Part of that mood shift of ‘if it could be used for trafficking then let’s ban it’. And which MPs are going to defend it and the non trafficked escorts who rely on it for business?

As I have been posting for a long time it will be on the context of trafficking that will be used as reasoning for any new laws in my view. In reality there are already enough laws in place, the police are generally too lazy to catch many traffickers preferring the easier targets and often it will be a brothel was raided with suspected trafficking, when it comes to court that's not one of the charges. The charges are controlling prostitutes for gain, willing WGs most of the time, running a brothel and money laundering, or all or a mixture of the three.

Offline smiths

For those who have not heard of the Archer case:

External Link/Members Only

Classic example of a soft as shit Judge, that evil cunt should of got life with a 25 year minimum in my opinion and if sentencing guidelines stopped the Judge being able to pass such a sentence they need charging asap.

Barry Shipton

  • Guest
I think we would all applaud moves to really crack down on trafficking pimps and prevent anyone being trafficked. But in the usual heavy handed way they will use it as an excuse to ban a much wider circle.

Think this dates back to when Theresa May was Home Secretary and actually enjoyed her job! That and her Christian upbringing as a vicars daughter making her take a moral stance. This was her first hint of what was on the cards last week.

External Link/Members Only

Not got anything against religion but just look at Northern Ireland for an example where the Christian extremists try to turn the clock back 70 years and use heavy handed laws to stamp out prostitution and abortion or pretend gay people don’t exist. But as ever it doesn’t stop it - just drives it underground and makes it less safe!

Offline Students Notebook

S.N. did you mean that?
HP

I'm so sorry HP.  Easy to get confused at my age LOL.

Do please forgive me.

N.S.  :wacko:

Offline Students Notebook

Wakey wakey. :rolleyes: The OP of the thread was HP not VW.

Now I see. :thumbsup:

But thanks anyway.

S.N.

Offline Bogof60

Banned reason: Abuse of a mod.
Banned by: daviemac

Offline Horizontal pleasures

I'm so sorry HP.  Easy to get confused at my age LOL.

Do please forgive me.

N.S.  :wacko:
No worries, maybe I am older than you even ?

Diehard

  • Guest
This is non news. There is no appetite in government to do anything about the sex industry as so many politicians use AW plus the sexy industry is vital to the economy.

It is like illegal arms dealing. Publicly will be frowned upon but the UK on elf the biggest arms dealers in the world.

Judges need to be a lot tougher on the vermin who traffic vulnerable girls.

Offline Simmo87

If we had proper border controls, sergi and his gang could not traffic girls as easy.

I just thinks its more 'storm in tea cup' headline to flog a few extra papers on a sunday.

Offline tynetunnel

Perhaps plod and the other agencies - social services, children’s home operators, councils and the like - would do better focussing on what went wrong with all the child sex exploitation in our cities - how the hell Rotherham ever happened, and countless other places like it - instead of worrying about (mainly) consenting adults.

I don’t mean that people being trafficked and pimped isn’t a terrible thing, of course it is. But child exploitation is even worse. This sick kiddie stuff needs to be stamped out properly before anybody worries about AW and UKP.  :hi:

Offline Steely Dan

This is a worry.  The words are getting stronger.  Remember politicians don't care about the cause, they care about votes.

If they cared about the cause, of course it is no worry.

-If one wants fewer trafficked escorts, make it easy for the local escorts to work.  Boost AW and UKP.  Fund them :) . Make two escorts working together legal.

-If one wants fewer underage escorts, make it easier for of-age escorts to work. Actions: As above.

It is not what they are doing.  They don't care about trafficking or underage. They want to make all prostitution difficult.  Will achieve the opposite.  But they don't care.

Cunts.

Worry.

And consider speaking up and voting.

Offline Tallchris

They're struggling enough with internet giants and extremism.  This will never happen.  If plod really wants to help trafficked girls then go to all of these pop up brothels.  The chinese/rom places that advertize on VS and backpage.  Read UKP, we all know how to spot the signs of  these places in order to avoid them. You don't need to be Columbo.

And as has been pointed out here before.  Trafficking/slavery also happens on farms and in restaurants.

And as for the papers.  It fills copy and is a bit titilating to put on a front page. 

Online sparkus

As others have pointed out, there's little male-orientated adult fun not being targeted these days and punting is low hanging fruit on that score.

Offline Dipper

If we had proper border controls, sergi and his gang could not traffic girls as easy.

I just thinks its more 'storm in tea cup' headline to flog a few extra papers on a sunday.

+ 1