The bogus studies behind the fall of the craigslist adult services listings

[nate_sf]

Interesting story in this week's SF Weekly/Village Voice about the studies that were frequently cited for justification of closing down the craigslist adult services listings. Turns out the methodology of the trafficking studies was highly dubious... some might go as far as to say bogus. Here's the story:

 

http://www.sfweekly.com/2011-03-23/news/sex-trafficking-fake-study-womans-funding-network-deborah-richardson-nick-pinto/

 

This is not to condone underage trafficking at all. In fact, underage trafficking being so unacceptable is what allowed the studies to go unchallenged. And I'll admit it did not occur to me to question the studies either, until reading this story.

[happyguy2]

On my way back from my latest trip, I was seated with men who run various relief and development charitable organizations. We had a fascinating conversation over the challenges and problems they face when dealing with extreme right wing web-sites who have appointed themselves judge and jury, accusing them of everything you can think of. This often jeapordizes their fiunding base and prevents them from doing good. In one case, many donors were lost because, as religious people, they could not support a pro-abortion organization. Once the organizations got to the bottom of it, this is what happened. A senior clerical person in this agency had attended a women's rally in a third world country where conditions are terrible for women. At that rally was the wife of a man who works for an organization that (unrelated to the agency) contributed to another organization that promoted abortion and womens reproductive rights. So, go figure. Looks like they all use the same tactics. Will anything come of this?

[instudiocity]

THEY, ALL OF THEM, LEFT, RIGHT AND CENTER use the same tactics. Sometimes we're so busy screaming at each other about the extremes, we forget all about the middle ground we have in common..

 

The WINGS are guilty!

 

On my way back from my latest trip, I was seated with men who run various relief and development charitable organizations. We had a fascinating conversation over the challenges and problems they face when dealing with extreme right wing web-sites who have appointed themselves judge and jury, accusing them of everything you can think of. This often jeapordizes their fiunding base and prevents them from doing good. In one case, many donors were lost because, as religious people, they could not support a pro-abortion organization. Once the organizations got to the bottom of it, this is what happened. A senior clerical person in this agency had attended a women's rally in a third world country where conditions are terrible for women. At that rally was the wife of a man who works for an organization that (unrelated to the agency) contributed to another organization that promoted abortion and womens reproductive rights. So, go figure. Looks like they all use the same tactics. Will anything come of this?