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.
meanwhile YouTube had a 3 strike policy for copyright claims that might not even be true
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.
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.
Jesus fuck, even 3-strikes would be absurd for this…
17 is an oddly specific number.
Those kinds of people probably don’t like anything the moment it turns 18
I have to believe Jerry, the exec who’s bad at his job but the CEO likes him, has 16 strikes. One more strike, and the CEO will be forced to update the policy again.
