Meta allegedly gave accounts engaged in the “trafficking of humans for sex” 16 chances before suspending them, according to testimony from the company’s former head of safety and well-being, Vaishnavi Jayakumar. The testimony — along with several other claims that Meta ignored problems if they increased engagement — surfaced in an unredacted court filing related to a social media child safety lawsuit filed by school districts across the country.
I’m not defending the policy but the title doesn’t match the story:
“That means that you could incur 16 violations for prostitution and sexual solicitation, and upon the 17th violation, your account would be suspended,”
Wait but that changes everything? Sex work doesn’t automatically mean sex trafficking??
Yeah, to me it’s muddy waters. While some people look down on it, if an adult posts something that says free Saturday night, hit me up for a price… That’s not anywhere near trafficking. But it is very much solicitation.
Yeah, but the title says only sex trafficking
It appears that the article and possibly the site is just ragebait bs.
So, 17 strikes you’re out.
Thats why baseball games in the 1800s were much longer.
You should look into the history of cricket
I mean, it IS The Verge. They could be so inept that they just forgot to include anything relating to the title in their story
that matches the title completely
Sex work =/= sex trafficking
Unless they have to drive to you during rush hour. Then it’s sex work with traffic.
the article is about sex trafficking, the policy would also apply to sex workers, eventually.
not everything about sex trafficking is about sex workers…
Sometimes. Probably not on Facebook.
There’s a pretty good This American Life about it. https://www.thisamericanlife.org/740/there-i-fixed-it
What’s “This american life”, beyond a podcast? Not something I’m familiar with.
Just a podcast.