Four days after an explosive New York Times opinion column blasted Pornhub for profiting off videos of exploitation and assault, the free porn site announced new policies to protect its community.
On Friday, NYT opinion columnist
I’ve spent the last few months reporting this piece about Pornhub. What most people don’t realize is that it’s infested with rape videos. I talked to child trafficking survivors whose rape videos the company had distributed and monetized. Unconscionable: https://t.co/bUgBiiFrYH
— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) December 4, 2020
In the wake of the NYT column, Visa and Mastercard announced they would investigate their financial links to MindGeek (as the NYT noted, in 2019 PayPal barred Pornhub, and providers of videos to the site, from making and accepting payments). UPDATE: On Thursday, as reported on by the New York Times, both Visa and Mastercard announced they have prohibited the use of their cards on Pornhub, a huge blow to the site. Read our update on this news here.
On Tuesday, Pornhub released a statement that trumpeted its commitment “to eliminating illegal content, including non-consensual material and child sexual abuse material (CSAM).” It unveiled new policies, including a stipulation that “effective immediately, only content partners and people within the Model Program will be able to upload content to Pornhub.” It also banned downloads and expanded its moderation policies, among other steps.
Meanwhile, XBIZ columnist Gustavo Turner published an op-ed calling the NYT piece “a sensationalistic call for state censorship and financial strangulation of Pornhub, packaged around gut-punching testimonials from young victims of sexual exploitation.” Turner wrote that Kristof botched an opportunity to write a nuanced piece about content moderation and instead turned the article “into a manipulative attempt to insert themselves in the complex debates around Section 230 — the so-called First Amendment of the internet — free speech online and sexual expression among consenting adults, including pornography.”
Tuner went on to say that “everything about ‘The Children of Pornhub’ is exploitative, from the testimonials, to the absolutely misguided photo essay taking advantage of a homeless teen to drive home a point and affect policy.”
On Tuesday, XBIZ also reported on the efforts of two Republican Senators, Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) and Ben Sasse (R-Neb.), who “previously called for online censorship and the revocation of Section 230 protections” and are seeking action against MindGeek. Kristof also noted that more than just Republican senators were taking action:
Another senator working on legislation to address companies like Pornhub. This is one of those rare bipartisan issues that left and right agree on. https://t.co/uKOZJnIpk3
— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) December 9, 2020
…and was encouraged by Pornhub’s changes, which will apply to all of MindGeek’s sites:
Pornhub just announced huge changes: a.) allow uploads only from verified users; b.) no downloads; c.) improvements in moderation. Initial take: A great deal depends on how responsibly Pornhub implements these, and it hasn’t earned my trust at all, but these seem significant.
— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) December 8, 2020
I’d add that continued monitoring and pressure will be necessary, and that we should also widen the lens to look at other companies. XVideos already has a bigger audience than Pornhub, and fewer scruples, and they should be forced to adopt similar measures — and make them work.
— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) December 8, 2020
Pornhub told me that the new policies applies to all Mindgeek sites, not just Pornhub. Again, a great deal depends on implementation, and skepticism is warranted, but this is still a huge deal. Canadians also get credit for the national debate lately about hosting Mindgeek.
— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) December 8, 2020
This is a lot to unpack. What do you think of the New York Times article, and of Turner’s lambasting of it? Do you think Turner has a point? One thing is clear: Giving content creators more control over their own content is a good thing, but it’s clear Pornhub has a lot more it needs to do to to make its site a healthy display of sexuality—and the stories of these victims is horrifying.
So they will get right on that…when the $$$$ is cut off.
Congress is going to overreact like they did when they passed FOSTA SESTA which caused Craigslist personals to go away among other censorship reactions to that law.
Pornhub should have been doing the right thing in the first place. There are too many porn sites that ,in my opinion, promote child porn. Some sites no matter if the actor is of legal age they look like a child and that is encouraging child porn! Sure if brothers doing it , fathers with sons or whatever as long as the actors definitely look of legal age. Some of the actors on these sites turn my stomach as it looks like a child being used in sex! Sites should not be able to show actors having sex so it turns on dirty pervert child Molesters! This is my opinion only some might not agree some may but thats just my opinion as these sites are the ones giving all gays a bad rep!
Dude you know that this is blog of a porn site right? It makes all its cash by: “show(ing) actors having sex”
Good for Pornhub trying to filter out any videos featuring underage children or child abuse. Sadly Pornhub like all the adult sites has thousands of videos at any given time and allows viewers to post videos anytime and no doubt some of these could be called objectionable making it almost impossible for the sites to immediately delete anything objectionable. Some people say filters would take away their right to free expression. Anyone with at least half a brain would say that’s BS.. For those ‘sick individuals’ and anyone who watches underage videos or condones sex with children is sick, pure and simple. A search on various sites will yield videos featuring underage children available for viewing. This reminds me of a group of gay men years ago with the moniker NAMBLA which stood for ‘National Man Boy Love Association. This group promoted sex between grown adult gay men and young underage boys. Thank God it was outlawed and disbanded.
It was never outlawed, it just went under ground when they could promote it quietly on the internet.
They couldn’t of been because of free speech, they can advocate for changing the laws they just can’t do what they are advocating for, unless the laws are changed. That is the 1st Amendment.
Fucking crybabies, why are you guys trying to ruin the industry with these fake lies. Are you guys just bashing in pornhub because they’re making more money than naked sword and falcon?????
I noticed the other day I could no longer download a gay scene or a solo jackoff scene on Pornhub; now I know why. Certainly the sexual exploitation of children is reprehensible, as is any scene of genuine rape or unconsensual sex. But it seems Pornhub couldn’t be bothered to weed out the bad so thy just eliminated all downloa — except, of course, those scenes where the subject charges anywhere from $1 to $10 for the download. Pornhub’s standards take a backseat when it comes to their cut of the download cost.
Oh fuck this shit! I am so sick of these people crying exploitation. This is politically acceptable sexual censorship, good ol’ fashioned Judeo-Christian values trying to tell us what to watch.
It’s easy to find someone somewhere with a sob story and then pretend that isolated incident is indicative of 1,000s and millions of people. If there is actual abuse we have laws and international police to uphold those laws. Special changes in MindGeek’s policies are utterly unnecessary and while I understand this surface compliance is easiest, at some point it MUST be fought. The SJW crybaby left and religious right can finally team up to limit our freedoms one asinine complaint at a time.
Dude they are children and adults being coerced.
There are enough adults that are willing to entertain our baser desires that we don’t need to exploit other humans to get our rocks off. Any legit producer, or consumer, of adult erotic entertainment should do everything they can to keep the exploiters off the distribution channels to preserve it for our enjoyment and profits, lest it gets shut down by the do-gooders.
There will always be rape and molestation. There have always been those thing and we haven’t altered that part of the human genome.
The issue is politically acceptable sexual censorship. When we create policies which upon a cursory glance could not alter these outcomes, then we’ve only succeeded in limiting the activities of those engaging in legal/ethical behavior.
THAT’S the concern: Wear a mask of “protect the weak.” Take actions which limit or harm the innocent.
This is also an old trick but some folks aren’t very bright, so it works.
good, bout time they get some attention. They’ve done so much damage to the industry I hope they burn in flames. Yeah I’m talking to you mindgeek also known as seancody/brazzers,/czech hunters/men.com