http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-sex-trafficking-backpage-20170831-story.html
"After a sustained assault from lawmakers, investigators and victims groups, the website Backpage.com agreed early this year to shut down its lucrative adult page, which had become a well-known sex-trafficking hub.
It wasn’t long before the company was back in the headlines.
The adult section was gone, but the sex traffic was not. In May, authorities in Stockton charged 23 people with involvement in a trafficking ring that was using another corner of Backpage to market sex with girls as young as 14. A Chicago teenager allegedly trafficked on Backpage had her throat slit in June.
The resilience of this platform — host to an estimated 70% of online sex trafficking at its peak — is a long-running public relations mess for the tech industry. Internet freedom laws held sacred in Silicon Valley have helped shield Backpage from prosecution and lawsuits by victims of gruesome sex trafficking.
Now the tech industry’s Backpage problem has evolved into a full-blown political crisis. An unexpectedly large coalition of lawmakers is aiming to hold sites like Backpage liable for trafficking, sparking panic in Silicon Valley over the far-reaching consequences for the broader Internet."
view the rest of the comments →
Are_we_sure ago
The law that protects Backpage also protects Voat. If I use this site for criminal activity, like posting child porn. I'm responsible for that not Voat.
sore_ass_losers ago
It's not just freedom of speech. It was shown that Backpage was editing ads for child sex so they didn't seem so obvious.
Are_we_sure ago
Right. But that would fall outside of the law the Silcon Valley is concerned with.
The article is making it seem like this law is about protecting sex trafficking when it's much, much broader than that.