Sky news pimping websites article

[Jardent6]

Sky news have done an investigation and apparently 75% of adverts on VS are victims of sex trafficking.

Mind blowing if true . Also looks like momentum is gathering to ban/regulate these websites

[Garyhart]

Sky news have done an investigation and apparently 75% of adverts on VS are victims of sex trafficking.

Mind blowing if true . Also looks like momentum is gathering to ban/regulate these websites

That’s not surprising at all, big reason why I’ve never used VS - profiles always disappearing after a few weeks and the avg punters review of VS SPs just screams abuse/exploitation but they like to be oblivious to it. The girls there offer their services extremely cheap for a reason in a very underwhelming / dirty environment, hopefully they do shut that site down as it seems less stringent than AW regarding checks and balances

[scutty brown]

That pretty much fits with what I've been saying on here for years. Perhaps people will start listening.
And don't try to evade the issue by saying "only use AW"..........the fact is if you exclude the AW listings for UK girls, then the 75% is roughly accurate for what's left

[scutty brown]

Sky news have done an investigation and apparently 75% of adverts on VS are victims of sex trafficking.

Mind blowing if true . Also looks like momentum is gathering to ban/regulate these websites

Jardent - have you got a link to where that 75% figure is actually reported?

[Garyhart]

That pretty much fits with what I've been saying on here for years. Perhaps people will start listening.
And don't try to evade the issue by saying "only use AW"..........the fact is if you exclude the AW listings for UK girls, then the 75% is roughly accurate for what's left

Of course, we’ve agreed on topics relating to this matter in the past regarding one or two reviews made in the London sub topic. What would be clear signs of something very dodgy going on was dismissed by several punters or they ignored others’ request to report a situation to the authorities, usually to avoid giving up discretion. For me personally, when I see reviews which has telltale signs of exploitation, I don’t go and see those girls myself. In my opinion, obvious signs are the following:

- Overcrowded and extremely messy accommodation (especially when there are more girls than rooms in the premises )
- Signs of abuse, burns, cuts all over the skin. Before anyone mentions self-harm, this is a thing but when they’re in a very overcrowded and often dirty home, according to reviews, you’ve got to look deeper into signs of physical abuse
- controlling / aggressive maid or Sergei and an SP
- massive discrepancy between service offered online / via text or comms with maid or sergei and what they offer in reality.
- extremely moody across various reviews or timid, especially when in conjunction with the above, for me is a sign something very illegal is going on

It’s up to punters to spot the signs and report it because you can’t complain when the government shut down every element of punting(including legal forms) if we don’t call it out to the authorities when we see it.

Unfortunately, most punters who see these very cheap SPs on VS are probably aware of what they’re doing but simply don’t care

[koshkaj]

Jardent - have you got a link to where that 75% figure is actually reported?

i believe these are the articles.

The 75% figure is mentioned around 16 secs into the video found on the first link

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

[Barneypunt]

Not surprised at all

[sparkus]

External Link/Members Only

[sparkus]

Sky News clip: External Link/Members Only

How long before UKP reviews end up in Hansard, Mr Speaker?

[bops909]

i believe these are the articles.

The 75% figure is mentioned around 16 secs into the video found on the first link

External Link/Members Only

External Link/Members Only

The 75 % is Sky's own desk research using  the research done by academics who devised the STIM tool which identified markers of exploitation in adverts.

Some of the markers are a bit iffy.

Tagging more than one advert with the same phone number as a marker of exploitation will catch some OCG outfits with dozens of profiles linked to one number, but there are also unexploited sole operators with more than one advert using the same number.

The STIM tool also count the absence of feedback as a marker, whereas we all know dodgy AW profiles can now get fake feedback very easily, so that marker is no longer very effective as an indicator.

The weaknesses in the tool aren't going to be taken into account unless VS really get their act together and get to work to defend their site's practices, and improve their standards.

VS do have a scam account problem.

There's more discussion and a link to the STIM tool here. Thanks to Scutty Brown for the link.

https://www.ukpunting.com/index.php?topic=431539.0

I expect there's already a researcher from Sky News or Eleanor Lyon's office scanning this forum for a follow up story...

Whoever does her Wikipedia page maybe as they are hot off the mark with updates...

[PilotMan]

ahhh, the great sky news.

I do occasionally use the site, but it's so full of click bait advertising that it brings in to doubt its own credibility.

[paul_tall_]

Vivastreets response re being regulated by ofcom , takes its responsibility seriously , obtaining id etc doesn’t correlate with the adverts that you see on the site amongst certain providers/agencies .
If they were serious about providing a platform that provides unquestionable adverts they will be reviewing frantically what they current are displaying but I don’t think we will see a mass drop off of adverts in the short term

[Atlas1957]

It is a misleading stat anyway, as it could be logically true that 99% of adverts on VS could be of trafficked WGs while at the same time only 1% of punts booked via VS could be trafficked WGs.

[globewindsailor]

Says they will release a report this month. Around the time a scottish committe will be considering their report on a bill to ban buying it in Scotland which is heavily playing up the trafficking angle.

[advent2016]

Sky news haven't told me anything that hasn't been said before many times.
A few years back we were testing the internet in a budget hotel chain in London and 90% of the traffic in the evening was to AW or VS porn sites and the most frequent search for porn was "Creampie" and a lot of the searches would now be considered illegal. The hotel were considering blocking such sites or offering premium internet access at extra cost with VPN to these types of site. Another revealing thing was the number of sex workers using the hotel at the time - Metadata is a wonderful/invasive thing.

A few regular SPs I see have profiles on AW and regular or static ads on VS and other places. I've asked a few about it, and they say VS is just another way of promotion, much like a card in a telephone box of old or back pages of local papers. These are not trafficked or are at least now working independently.

I used to try a lot of new providers, but in recent months have preferred seeing existing ones on my list (whom I've already written reports for) or massages with HE, unless spectacular or a TOFTT I can't write much about getting a massage and a HJ. Also, the age check and verify your connection every few minutes when using a VPN with VS and similar is irksome. I tend to go for the more mature providers in any case, as they seem to provide a better service for my requirements.

[randyrobert]

There have been loads of attempts to identify trafficking victims from clues on-line escort advertisements-STIM is only one of the more recent ones-unfortunately it turns up a lot of false positives-that is non-forced prostitutes ( see this paper on STIM (Embedding critical reflective practice in policing: Reflections from a practitioner-academic collaboration in the context of technology-facilitated human trafficking External Link/Members Only ) . It appear that at least some police forces are more clued up than arm chair academics.

Although not clear on the details it looks as though Sky-News has employed tools such as STIM to estimate the proportion of escorts that may be trafficked. In fact the objective of the tool was to help law enforcement to prioritise cases for further examination-recognising that there are many non-coerced prostitutes whose advertisements may be picked up by tools such as STIM.

And then there is the question as to what is meant by “trafficking”-there is the strict legal definition which can be simply aiding a SP-to what is the more important identifying those who are unwilling and coerced by threats and forced by criminals to be prostitutes (and that is the definition I think most on here would regard as trafficking).

There is a grey area of those who while not regarding prostitution as the greatest job in the world are prepared to tolerate it for the money it brings in so they can help their families back home. These people are sometimes aided by things as simple as WhatsApp groups where prostitutes exchange information as to where to go and suitable accommodation and how to get there or recommendations between managers of massage parlours about who is a “good girl” who the customers like.

What is most important is to identify those who are being forced into the industry-I don’t think tools such as STIM help much here

[Jazzy99]

There is an older BBC article back in 2021 with the same "takeaway" reference - External Link/Members Only

Banning sites like AW \ VS is counter productive, it will only drive it underground into the dark web and this will only make it more difficult to monitor for trafficking \ underage prostitution etc. Instead, maybe it is time to properly legalise it and work with the platforms for the safety of workers and punters.

[Tony Blair]

Sky News clip: External Link/Members Only

How long before UKP reviews end up in Hansard, Mr Speaker?

The reviews on Escort Ireland are cited by Scottish Government as part of a policy document
These reviews appear to be mostly made up and contain a huge amount of rose tinted nonsense.

External Link/Members Only

[sparkus]

Meanwhile, back in 2009...

External Link/Members Only

[Mstar86]

For me all cheap escorts seems risky and all VS escorts carry the same risk.

That risk is exploitation and I’m no way wanting any part of it.

I know it’s not black and white but I feel as punters it’s our duty to look for signs and not shop in the wrong places….

[Garyhart]

For me all cheap escorts seems risky and all VS escorts carry the same risk.

That risk is exploitation and I’m no way wanting any part of it.

I know it’s not black and white but I feel as punters it’s our duty to look for signs and not shop in the wrong places….

Agreed, I also mentioned this among my points of clear signs of what to avoid, however, this will go ignored by many punters in the hunt for extremely cheap EEs and they’ll be surprised why their attitude isn’t great in a deep red negative review

[midspunter]

For me all cheap escorts seems risky and all VS escorts carry the same risk.

That risk is exploitation and I’m no way wanting any part of it.

I know it’s not black and white but I feel as punters it’s our duty to look for signs and not shop in the wrong places….

This. I've been saying for years. Especially if the woman doesn't speak English, how can you even begin to understand what you are enabling?

[sammathy]

Once again the anti-prostitution keratin hair treatment brigade show up to look down on girls who don't want to wear pinstripe suits and sit in corp meetings. Here to ban the hobby instead of fully legalising it. We only have to look across to Ireland and the USA, to see that bans don’t work and instead leads everyone involved to pivot to even more riskier practices. Is the marriage and birth rate really that low now? Low enough for the economists to deem a full-ban necessary enough to incentivise single men back into relationships?

[chrisintcov]

Do we know if aw checks whether non-British service providers are legally entitled to work in the UK.  I know from previous posts from sp’s that there are quite rigorous checks on ID now, but how have thousands of South and Central Americans appeared in the last couple of years, particularly after Brexit?

[sammathy]

Do we know if aw checks whether non-British service providers are legally entitled to work in the UK.  I know from previous posts from sp’s that there are quite rigorous checks on ID now, but how have thousands of South and Central Americans appeared in the last couple of years, particularly after Brexit?

Not quite sure either. Both Brazil and Romania require ETA's to enter, according to Passport Index, but way more Brazilians than Romanians in most cities around the UK. Perhaps Brazilian Real's exchange rate?

[paul_tall_]

Do we know if aw checks whether non-British service providers are legally entitled to work in the UK.  I know from previous posts from sp’s that there are quite rigorous checks on ID now, but how have thousands of South and Central Americans appeared in the last couple of years, particularly after Brexit?

Why would AW need to check right to work? They don’t employee them just provide a platform to advertise their services

[chrisintcov]

Why would AW need to check right to work? They don’t employee them just provide a platform to advertise their services

I agree that they don’t need to check for the right to work.  But if doing that reduces the number of providers it lists who clearly superficially couldn’t have a right to be sex workers, it might give them a better defence against pimping accusations.

[IBIZA]

That pretty much fits with what I've been saying on here for years. Perhaps people will start listening.
And don't try to evade the issue by saying "only use AW"..........the fact is if you exclude the AW listings for UK girls, then the 75% is roughly accurate for what's left

  you are clueless.

[Garyhart]

you are clueless.

Care to inform us on what to truth is then? Judging by your reviews, half the girls you’ve seen fit the criteria of what the news article mentions

[IBIZA]

I’ve seen hundreds of Eastern Europeans/Roms/gypsies etc on Vivastreet and out of a hundred I would say only 2 were suspect. You do the math.

Forget what scutty says. He thinks most girls are trafficked. He has no clue whatsoever.

[Garyhart]

I’ve seen hundreds of Eastern Europeans/Roms/gypsies etc on Vivastreet and out of a hundred I would say only 2 were suspect. You do the math.

Forget what scutty says. He thinks most girls are trafficked. He has no clue whatsoever.

Dude, look at the amount of phone numbers in some of your reviews - do the maths on that and tell me if that’s normal or not. Most women who are trafficked tend to fit the profile of women you’re seeing and if you suspect 2 were trafficked, what did you do to get to the bottom of it?

[IBIZA]

 

They are all the same number in different formats for search purposes.

I said they were suspect(meaning not 100% confirmed).

Why did I do? I paid them, shot my load and left.

[scutty brown]

you are clueless.

you need to take your blinkers off

[IBIZA]

you need to take your blinkers off

 

Yeah sure.. Whatever you say stiffbiggley 

[filthyscotslover]

Legalize it properly and get the girls out of the hands of pimps. Idiots in power will go the other way and ban it, making it much worse for sex workers