Cops Give Tips to Escort Clients
December 18, 2007 | 2 Comments
A Charlotte, NC news station warns clients about the dangers of screening. An escort service was busted a few weeks ago and police have been unraveling their records (and reporters have been writing breathless articles over the investigation).
This particular article focuses on the client records the agency kept. It seems the police feel it’s incriminating to clients and, of course, feel that clients submitting personal information isn’t in the clients’ best interests.
I have a real problem with this entire article.
If the police want to offer escort agencies tips on running their agencies, perhaps they should stop trying to arrest everyone involved. That would be a great start and I think everyone: agencies, escorts, clients — would be happier that way.
The police involved in this case are either stupid or playing dumb. Escorts require screening information to 1) make sure their client isn’t a cop and 2) for their own safety since the law doesn’t protect them in any way. Having a client’s real and personal information is the only safeguard escorts have against something bad happening. And if something does go wrong, the client can be arrested (hopefully). (Screening does not stop violence or theft, but it lessens the number of incidents.)
Printing propaganda like this just gives clients more ammunition in refusing to give screening info. Escorts have enough difficulties in getting screening information for their own safety. Having the police threaten clients doesn’t do anything to stop men from seeing escorts, it only make the job riskier for escorts. The client risk — which is always low — is even lower if they refuse to give screening information. The risk to escorts rises exponentially every time a client is allowed to see an escort without giving screening information.
Frankly, it doesn’t help clients either. If more escorts stop screening (because of client demand), more escorts are going to get arrested. Clients are far more at risk from an arrested escort than they are from one who diligently screens. (Arrested escorts often go back to work and may be supplying information or under surveillance.)
So I’m wondering if the police have decided to make life easier for themselves by trying to scare clients into demanding less screening, therefore making it easier to arrest escorts. If this is their goal, it’s not well thought-out. Escorts will be the ones to suffer from this idea; just as they’re already more often arrested than clients. And often brutalized by police.
Although this article tries to be fair, it basically sees clients as people with certain rights (even though they’re breaking the law as much as escorts are — if escorts are indeed breaking the law). Escorts and the agency in question seem to have no rights — perhaps because they’re not quite the same as “regular” people? This attitude also leads to major problems with escorts. Yesterday was the 5th Annual International Day to End Violence Against Sex Workers. A large part of this violence happens because sex workers are not seen as human beings.
Encouraging clients to refuse screening does not stop sexual exploitation or help escorts. As long as escort work remains criminalized, the only protection escorts have is in gathering client information and background checking. Remove that slim margin of protection…the cops are going to have a lot more to do than merely arrest agency owners and investigate their books.
Hushmail Isn’t Private
December 14, 2007 | Leave a Comment
Last month Hushmail turned over PGP encryption keys to American authorities in a steroid case. Escorts who aren’t steroid users might not be concerned, but it clearly shows that Hushmail, though a Canadian company, is willing to help investigations on suspected criminals.
No e-mail system is secure. Assume that every e-mail is being saved and read. Never say anything incriminating in an e-mail.
Weekly Papers Dropping Adult Ads
October 2, 2007 | Leave a Comment
Over the past few years more and more “alternative” weeklies have been dropping adult ads, mostly due to discomfort with the ads and what they imply. Another round of ad-dropping occurred this summer in New York (when a paper decided to “fumigate” itself).
This is interesting because papers — large and small — are citing declining readership and loss of ad revenue. They hope to cut a major source of revenue (adult ads) which should encourage mainstream advertisers to advertise again. Yet if they drop adult ads, aren’t some of their readers going to go away too? And even if they have a squeaky-clean paper, does that mean their readership is going to increase?
A much longer piece from Ft. Worth details the decision process. The ironic thing about the Ft. Worth article (published 2002; quote from page 4) is:
The Observer toned down its ads last year and is planning more restrictions, Draper said. “Back in November, I made a decision that we’d gone too far and we needed to scale it back,” she said. “This is a business we don’t pursue — they come to us. Obviously we want to keep the door open to all kinds of businesses and new advertisers, but it was too heavy.”
I know from my own experience that wasn’t true. In 2002, I got a phone call from an advertising rep at The Observer attempting to sell adspace to me. They e-mailed me with weekly rates and tried really hard to get my advertising dollars.
It was too expensive and, besides, I didn’t want to advertise in a newspaper. Why would I?
I had the Internet.
As more and more newspapers shut down their adult advertising sections, more and more advertisers will go online. The ill-informed go to CraigsList or other free services. The better-informed go to online paid advertising or create a Web site and start trading links. This means an even higher amount of growth for the online adult industry across all niches and support-services.
