The New York Times has another opinion piece targeting Goldman Sachs (one begins to wonder if there are no other bad guys on the face of the planet to focus on) but this time tying the investment bankers to a “recent case in New York City, prosecutors say that a 15-year-old girl was drugged, tied up, raped and sold to johns.”
Here is the connection. In 2000, the private equity group at Goldman bought a 16% stake in Village Voice, the famous alternative newspaper group. In 2006 Village Voice bought an online classified company, similar to Craig’s List, called Backpage.com. Backpage advertises for cars to jobs to childcare. But it also does a brisk business in adult classifieds. When Craig’s List stopped allowing adult classifieds, Backpage picked up where they left off. Backpage has 70 percent of the market for prostitution ads, according to AIM Group that is a watchdog group that estimates revenue attributable to this kind of advertising.
Certainly the sex trade includes plenty of consenting adults but sex trafficking of minors also occurs electronically, as classifieds have become the most used way for pimps to attract johns without having to put themselves at risk (see my prior piece, “Teen Prostitution”).
NICHOLAS D. KRISTOF in the NYT oped, “Financiers and Sex Trafficking” ties this all together from Goldman to the Village Voice to Backpage to the 15 year-old girl that was sold using, “Backpage and other sites.”
Let’s get a few things straight here.
Sex trafficking is slavery as defined by the 13th Amendment. That’s why Homeland Security has become involved in investigating the problem throughout the U.S. (see: “Sex Slavery in America”).
Nothing I am about to say condones sex trafficking or those that participate in activities by which underage girls and boys are treated with horrific abuse.
But committing those acts and owning a minority stake in a well known group of newspapers—a company you do not control in any way—that decides to buy an online company that in turn has classified ads that hosts adult ads some of which might be used inappropriately are two very different things.
Should Goldman and other financial owners put pressure on the Village Voice to, as Craig’s List did, get rid of the adult section of Back Pages or at least police it in such a way to make sure there is no sex trafficking? Absolutely. That makes good sense.
Will that likely make much of an impact, by itself, on sex trafficking in America? Not really. There are tons of smaller sites that will always allow advertising of this kind. Most of the prostitutes I have interviewed to try to understand how the sex trade actually works have said that local alternative newspapers are the most common place to place an ad. None of those are going away anytime soon.
Is the motivation of Kristof’s piece more about sex trafficking or more about trying to throw one more punch in the face of Goldman Sachs? I can’t really say but I did notice that the mid-level executive Greg Smith who made such a splash with his open letter of resignation in the NYT (for the record I worked at Goldman too and this was my view of that, “The Real Goldman”) got a $1.5 million book deal.
Maybe Kristof was jealous. What do you think?
___
Want to know the truth about Sex Trafficking and Human Trafficking around the world? I wrote this research paper and am a Human Rights adviser to 35 countries. Here is the link: https://www.academia.edu/5874656/The_Economic_Subordination_of_Women_in_the_21st_Century_Sex_Slave_Trade
Most prostitutes are sex trafficked by one means or another. A UN Resolution on Human Trafficking was presented in 2013 and again last year. The United States has refused to back the resolution because the US Military and the UN protect the slave traders. Read the paper if you dare.
The Winkle Institute for Worldwide Economic Stability
Mark Winkle, Founder
This was just the most recent of literally dozens of arrests made in the last two years connecting backpages with illegal slavery and child trafficking. This one occurred only last week. http://articles.baltimoresun.com/2012-03-29/news/bal-police-rescue-missing-15yearold-girl-from-pimp-at-motel-20120329_1_police-rescue-prostitution-motel
This past week the son of the owner of Village Voice also joined the protest against his father’s complicitness in child trafficking and human slavery.
Why is it NOW people “analyze the truth’ when no one serioulsy questioned the validity of anything these bankers have said for years and years and years, even if it were blatant lies and / or out and out illegal? This includes “bail out” money that they mostly kept for themselves and helped very little. And also an interesting factual tid-bit: Did you know a lot of “banking’ entities came directly form WWII Germany? May explain a lot (including lack of media attention as to where your money is REALLY going) Look it up for yourself!
I think there’s a point you’ve overlooked. There was a judgement a while back that said that publicly traded companies are *prohibited* from doing what is “right” (in this context I use right to mean something other than legal) when that conflicts with making a profit. I learned about this here: http://www.bcorporation.net/index.cfm?fuseaction=modalContent.content&id=00EC4D56-B9DE-48D7-A23B-900500BE085A – I’m not affiliated with them, but I love the idea.
That’s the real underlying problem with many of our corporate excesses in this country, codification of greed into law. That’s what needs to change.
Could it simple be an instance of conveniently looking the other way as profits mount? Exploitation of minors? Ethics? Is this something Goldman Sachs really looks into, (they did control a board seat for 4 years) or only when it’s caught when we demand it ought to? Or it could also be the New York Times having one more go at Goldman Sachs after a brutal expose by insider Greg Smith as he questioned his soon to be ex employers’ business ethics? After all nothing sells more than the allegations of a purported hero or homewrecker once again acting out… Read more »
It is ridiculous to think that Goldman was on the Board of Directors for 4 years while this was going on and then have you claim they didn’t know what was going on.. Oh and your assertion that Goldman had no influence is simply retarded — if they had no influence they would have left long before they spent 4 more years on this (they are called “Directors” for a rather obvious reason). Finally, every company I’ve ever seen where Goldman invested has Goldman stipulated in the fine print as the primary party that vets new Board Members. So even… Read more »
I don’t see what is wrong with Backpage in the first place. Kristof is totally irresponsible. Backpage has cooperated with law enforcement, they don’t allow ads for underage girls. They are responsible. What exactly does Kristof want from them? He doesn’t really say.
Kristof logic should be applied directly to Kristof himself. Kristof is irresponsible. He needs to be shutdown NOW! The New York Time is extremely irresponsible to turn a blind eye to such an irresponsible, dangerous, muckraker. Shut Kristof down.
“Nothing I am about to say condones sex trafficking or those that participate in activities by which underage girls and boys are treated with horrific abuse.”
Thank you for the gender inclusive language.
Incidentally is there a word for women who buy prostitutes or does ‘johns’ include them as well?
I think that someone should conduct a study or write an investigative piece on sting-operations against backpage. That adult services ads on backpage are primarily for underaged women or women forced into prostitution has become common knowledge. Is this belief in any way grounded in reality? I highly doubt it. But the best way to assess that claim would probably be to look through national records from sting operations targeting ads placed on backpage, and find out for yourself. One would assume that targetting under-aged and trafficked women is a law enforcement priority, so the data is probably skewed towards… Read more »
Meg I agree. The one thing I found the most offensive about the piece was trying to tie BackPage, and thus Goldman, to a specific case when the actual court document makes no mention of BackPage specifically.
I guess the question is if you walk by someone being hurt are you morally responsible to help? I am guessing many people will say no out of self-preservation, if I give aid I could be hurt too. And there is an argument that that will make the people that depend on them more vulnerable, but less remove that . Now there is enough distance that there is no risk to life or limb. Providing there was some responsibility in the first place,how much distance has to be there before you can ignore it with a clean conscience?
Kristof didn’t put Goldman Sachs in his headline. You did. And what’s the motivation behind your piece? Maybe you’re jealous? 🙂
See – this can go on ad nauseum!
The village voice has been one of the prime critics of the Sex Trafficing NGOs and their approach to the problem. I guess this leaves them open to attacks like this.