A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong • Hacker News Board

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#251

Post by throwaway894345 » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:26 PM UTC

justinator wrote: post #192

surge wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same crap as the ad-pocalypse. Journalists with an agenda use a disingenuous tactic, if they have a problem with a person or entity, they'll call up their sponsors, business partners, vendors, etc, and say "we're writing an article on X's platform which has been found to have (controversial material framed in a negative context), are we to believe that you're supportive and would your company care to comment…

That’s quite the axe to grind against journalists. Especially since their job is to ask questions. To think they’re a part of this mass conspiracy to take powerful entities down is laughable. My partner, a journalist, has gotten death threats just by being at peaceful protests against certain groups that have wealth and pull in the community - just because members of that org were certain the journalist was the main…

It doesn’t require a conspiracy, the parent postulates a single journalist at a prestigious publication.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#252

Post by afavour » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:27 PM UTC

rkk3 wrote: post #247

afavour wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's look at this from the reverse angle: Did PornHub have revenge porn, child trafficking, etc. on the site? Yes. The twitter thread concedes this point. So this isn't "just a hit piece with unverified out of context accusations". Is that fair game to report on? I'd certainly say it is. If you're going to publish a potentially explosive article about something, is it better or worse to reach out to sponsors, partne…

> Did PornHub have revenge porn, child trafficking, etc. on the site? Yes. Does Facebook have revenge porn, child trafficking, etc. on the site? Yes.

I don’t understand the point… journalists shouldn’t report on child trafficking content unless they catalogue every instance of child trafficking content on the internet?

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#253

Post by tomc1985 » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:28 PM UTC

justinator wrote: post #192

surge wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same crap as the ad-pocalypse. Journalists with an agenda use a disingenuous tactic, if they have a problem with a person or entity, they'll call up their sponsors, business partners, vendors, etc, and say "we're writing an article on X's platform which has been found to have (controversial material framed in a negative context), are we to believe that you're supportive and would your company care to comment…

That’s quite the axe to grind against journalists. Especially since their job is to ask questions. To think they’re a part of this mass conspiracy to take powerful entities down is laughable. My partner, a journalist, has gotten death threats just by being at peaceful protests against certain groups that have wealth and pull in the community - just because members of that org were certain the journalist was the main…

If a specific journalist has an axe to grind they don't need to be part of a larger conspiracy to ask damaging questions.

There are some people that enjoy the power trip of forcing the hand of large companies, and there are others that will get behind a cause dogmatically and are capable of inflicting extreme damage -- no conspiracy required.

That is what I suspect happened with that NYT piece, because its depictions of PornHub were distorted and off-base. And the damage stretches far and wide.

And judging by the Twitter thread this seems to be the case.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#254

Post by mola » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:29 PM UTC

giantrobot wrote: post #201

pcbro141 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is it really the case that most OnlyFans girls would turn to more dangerous things like prostitution? It kinda feels like OnlyFans has somewhat normalized/popularized young women going from Instagram 'influencer' (sometimes starting underage unfortunately, HS kids use it) to pornstar, for young women who otherwise probably wouldn't have entered the world of porn if it weren't for the fact that the hot Instagram girl…

If a girl goes from Instagram to OnlyFans willingly and is getting paid...why should anyone judge her or care? How is that any different from her making videos about video games or revising books and making money?

Human psychology

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#255

Post by throw3849 » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:31 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #209

throw3849 wrote: post #195

Every US porn site needs to keep record of models, release forms etc.. This has been problem for a long time, for example old VHS tapes do not usually comply. OnlyFans and other sites were in violation of these rules for very long time. Edit: fix typo

> OnlyFans and other sites very in violation of these rules for very long time. I think the big problem is actually with fairly recent changes in how the rules are applied (and maybe to the rules themselves, not just application) to intermediate distributors between the producer and the consumer which has caused existing sites to have compliance issues.

OnlyFans is still a pornsite and should comply. Pornhub has the same producer/subscribers model and is doing fine.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#256

Post by daptaq » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:32 PM UTC

vbezhenar wrote: post #139

rendall wrote: post #94

I've never heard a good argument against prostitution. The arguments that I hear are against trafficking, rape, child molestation; which are all non-sequiturs: true and valid statements that do not support the argument itself. Can anyone here argue against prostitution per se? I'll listen.

A generic argument: prostitution allows woman without any skills to earn plenty of money which might convince women do go this way even if they don't really enjoy it. The same argument could be made about IT. Prostitutes sell their private parts, programmers sell their brains.

One aspect I find frightening about interpreting prositution as a "real job" is that women could be denied unemployment benifits if they reject a job that would involve them selling their body and their consent.

> The same argument could be made about IT. Prostitutes sell their private parts, programmers sell their brains.

I don't think this works, because a brain is a "tool" used to "produce" a service, while a prositute is actually just providing their body to be used. They are competing with puppets and animals (e.g. https://www.vice.com/en/article/dpdnp7/yo1-v14n10), and are as such reduced to objects potentially beyond human dignety.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#257

Post by mbesto » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:34 PM UTC

justinator wrote: post #192

surge wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same crap as the ad-pocalypse. Journalists with an agenda use a disingenuous tactic, if they have a problem with a person or entity, they'll call up their sponsors, business partners, vendors, etc, and say "we're writing an article on X's platform which has been found to have (controversial material framed in a negative context), are we to believe that you're supportive and would your company care to comment…

That’s quite the axe to grind against journalists. Especially since their job is to ask questions. To think they’re a part of this mass conspiracy to take powerful entities down is laughable. My partner, a journalist, has gotten death threats just by being at peaceful protests against certain groups that have wealth and pull in the community - just because members of that org were certain the journalist was the main…

> To think they’re a part of this mass conspiracy to take powerful entities down is laughable.

I agree with your overall sentiment, but the fact that a journalist may make $20/hr is all the more reason for motivating them, individually, towards uncovering mass conspiracies. In other words, a large scandal no matter how true or not that garners a lot of attention is sure to lead to potential writing prizes, more compensation, bonuses, etc. So while I don't think every media company has some grand Murdoch-like figure that can play individual journalists like puppets, I do think there is a lot to be gained by an individual journalist leaning towards being overly harsh.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#258

Post by chitowneats » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

Telemakhos wrote: post #28

chitowneats wrote: post #12

"So why the rule changes? Because last December the New York Times published an opinion piece by Nick Kristof caller “The Children of Pornhub” that accused the site and its parent company of profiting off revenge porn, child porn and sex trafficking....which, to be clear, they kinda were." Kinda, huh? Of course the more important point, according the thread's author, is that: "Kristof’s story might have been correct…

My right-wing friends would be very surprised to learn that the New York Times and Nick Kristof now represent them.

Yeah I should have put "right-wing" in scare quotes.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#259

Post by pcbro141 » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:37 PM UTC

mola wrote: post #254

giantrobot wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If a girl goes from Instagram to OnlyFans willingly and is getting paid...why should anyone judge her or care? How is that any different from her making videos about video games or revising books and making money?

Human psychology

It's natural to not want your 18 year old daughter posting butthole pics on the internet. She could very well come to regret doing that later in life.

Re: A lot of people are getting the OnlyFans story wrong

#260

Post by bko » Fri, Aug 20, 2021, 4:39 PM UTC

yarcob wrote: post #170

surge wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the same crap as the ad-pocalypse. Journalists with an agenda use a disingenuous tactic, if they have a problem with a person or entity, they'll call up their sponsors, business partners, vendors, etc, and say "we're writing an article on X's platform which has been found to have (controversial material framed in a negative context), are we to believe that you're supportive and would your company care to comment…

No. If a journalist asking uncomfortable questions about your business endangers your business, then the problem is not the journalist, the problem is your business. If a journalist blows a story out of proportion, then usually nothing happens and the story is forgotten after a few months. But in the porn hub story, the uncomfortable truth is that there was a lot of involuntary porn on the platform. The NYT story jus…

I'm surprised the post didn't mention Operation Choke Point, an Obama era regulation that put more restrictions on payment processing for certain categories.

I think it's easy to point to "religious groups" and op-eds and not to the overall regulatory push into more aspects of the economy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Choke_Point