OnlyFans: How it handles illegal sex videos - BBC investigation

Discussion in 'Pornography Addiction' started by Deleted User, Aug 20, 2021.

  1. Deleted User

    Deleted User Guest

    Apparently, it would be great news if a platform like OnlyFans takes drastic measures to avoid pornography on its platform.

    I invite you to read the BBC article that came out today:
  2. DoneAtLast

    DoneAtLast Well-Known Member

    You beat me to it! Thanks for the link - that answers some questions other articles I read didn't.

    I had also read that they were going to have problems with credit card companies. Supposedly credit card companies were pulling support for PornHub for similar shenanigans like leaving up rape videos long after they were reported and so on.

    I also wonder if this is just a savvy business move for OnlyFans. They've been trying to sell themselves as classier than a normal porn site for a while, and this could be them seeing that niche. For example, Belle Delphine (I mentioned her in another thread but couldn't remember her name at the time) was doing really well on Instagram but got a little too risque and made the move to OnlyFans. As far as I know she is still in the mild-erotica/cosplay/whatever realm and not full on porn, and they might see a strong niche like that. The fan followings for models like that tend to be much more devoted (and spend more money) than with the typical porn star. They will still allow nudity, so it isn't clear exactly how they'll be defining pornographic. It reminds me of a photo site from the early 2000s that billed itself as fine photography of beautiful women but NOT porn... but, the pictures appeared in porn galleries everywhere, so it was just semantics.

    Whether it is a good sign or a bad sign, I have no idea. The movement to show the damage porn does has not gained much headwind in the past five years. On the other hand, OnlyFans wasn't finding investors, so I'm thinking the cultural ideas that porn is super healthy and normal might be falling out of fashion a bit. They've gone back to being creeped out by the short hairy guys in hawaiian shirts with big pinky rings, instead of seeing it as part of a revolution, I guess.
  3. Doper

    Doper Well-Known Member

    I have a much bigger problem with being forced to use private companies with absolute natural monopolies as intermediaries in purchases, and then those companies being able to tell me what I can and cannot do, than I care about some chicks, who work for themselves, by their own volition, make some extra money for themselves.

    As is mentioned above, certain companies have become so powerful that the heads of said companies can start taking part in societal engineering and completely disrupt the supply chain of products and services simply by concluding that "I don't like that completely legal product, I'm not going to let people buy it anymore" or in the case of the shipping couriers: "I don't like that completely legal product, we're not going to allow that to be shipped with our platform anymore." ... Disgusting. And of course, anti-trust regulators are nowhere to be found, because as that crazy guy in They Live notes "They're runnin' the whole show!" ... and remember, just because it might give one some "good feelz", doesn't make it right. It is up to the justice system to deal with issues involving "leaving up rape videos after being reported", not private companies. One might rebut that private companies can do whatever they want with their platform, it's theirs. But in the case of a natural monopoly like Mastercard, which functions more as a public utility than any kind of competitive entity, this is not the case.

    What we need guys, is a completely foolproof, intuitive, porn blocker that doesn't compromise system functioning in any way. Nothing even approaching this exists. So people can THEMSELVES, choose, how they want to live their life. I don't want to stop some chicks making money, I want a way to block trash on my own computer. And not just porn, anything that wastes my time. That's it, that's all.
    I realize this rant was slightly off topic, but to bring it back, I'll bet any amount Onlyfans backtracks on this ban.
    Last edited: Aug 21, 2021
    BuddhaPunkRobotMonk likes this.
  4. DoneAtLast

    DoneAtLast Well-Known Member

    I am not sure that is what is going on here, though. The credit companies staying away from PornHub wasn't on principle of them being a porn site, but because of their irresponsibility with deleting illegal videos and unwillingness to discourage sex trafficking. With OnlyFans it is less clear. The article implies that it has been a bit of an issue, but I'm not feeling like I'm getting straight answers anywhere. I imagine if a credit company just decided to be anti-porn, OnlyFans would be one of the last sites they go after rather than the first, so I'm doubtful that is the case here. As for lacking investors, I'm guessing that investors are just being risk-adverse. They don't want to be tied to a company that will show up in the news some day for some scandal whether in the porn industry or not, and anything porn is going to be much more risky than somewhere else they can invest. That would explain OnlyFans's move here, as they're trying to demonstrate for investors that they are low risk. That has been their M.O. all along to present a more genteel sort of porn, that is why I'm suspicious it is really just a marketing move.

    Honestly, I don't think the porn industry is in any risk of being "canceled", and the freedom issues are not in jeopardy. On Twitter you can find plenty of accounts saying things about how children should be taught about kink and how, while hardcore porn is too much for kids, there should be a more kid friendly sort of porn available to them, and all sorts of other borderline-grooming stuff that doesn't get flagged. But, if you mis-gender someone (calling a trans-woman "he/him") you can have your account suspended. Those sites seem to only do as much as they are legally obligated to do in order to keep operating and to please investors for above reasons. I don't see any big tech company becoming dogmatically anti-porn in the foreseeable future.

    Agreed. I read in the article that someone was dismayed that underage people might be looking at the material! *gasp!* I've long thought that viewing porn should be an opt-in thing - you have to unlock it - rather than having to jump through hoops to lock it up. Remember the old video stores? These days it is like the porn is in the main shelves, and the regular movies are in the closet with the curtain in front of it. I mentioned this once to a lawyer who works on porn/trafficking related cases, and she said that the tech companies could do this in an instant if they so desired, they just choose not to.

    Time will tell. Ultimately I think the ball is in the porn sites' court. They're too big to be as sleezy as they have in the past and it will cause problems the more advocacy groups pop up to talk about it. Either they'll win and keep being sleezy (not taking down known underage/rape videos, etc.), they'll be forced to clean up their acts, or they'll get pushed out of business. I struggle to really see it as any kind of freedom of expression issue, though.
  5. Deleted User

    Deleted User Guest



    Thank you. With pleasure. I found it interesting. I strive to share interesting things and I'm glad to know that you found this news useful.

Share This Page