In 2016, Congress passed a law designed to hold websites liable for any content that could be construed as advertising sexual services. The law, dubbed FOSTA-SESTA, was intended to deter sex trafficking, but in reality, it has only made it more difficult for workers who sell consensual sex to protect themselves from violent predators and unsafe sex. As I noted in my book, Getting Screwed: Sex Workers and the Law, sex workers who engage in consensual commercial sex use often online platforms to protect themselves by screening new clients online and negotiating the terms of service prior to meeting. A landmark study in 2017 found that in the years before it was shut down, craigslist’s erotic services site reduced female homicide rates by 17 percent in the U.S., largely because sex workers were able to use the free advertising service to move into a safer indoor environments and screen clients more carefully. (Craigslist removed the site in 2010 after pressure from law enforcement).
Even before FOSTA-SESTA was passed, state and federal agents had arrested the operators of websites such as Backpage, Rentboy and Redbook, all of which allowed sex workers to advertise and screen clients. Officials billed these arrests as anti-trafficking efforts, but there was no evidence that these websites knowingly abetted sex trafficking, and in fact no trafficking charges were ever filed against the operators of these sites. They were charged with promoting prostitution but even those charges were dropped against the operators of Backpage after a recent mistrial.
In the meantime, a Congressional report found that FOSTA-SESTA has so far been ineffective in deterring trafficking; no one has filed a civil suit or sought criminal restitution under the new law, according to this Government Accountability Office report. The law, however, has made it more difficult for sex workers to protect themselves and forced many into the more dangerous environment of the street, sex work advocates say. Two years ago, Democratic legislators introduced a bill that would re-examine the effects of FOSTA-SESTA for precisely these reasons, but the status of this legislation remains unclear.
FOSTA-SESTA essentially attempted to carve out an important piece of the Communications Decency Act known as Section 230, which protects websites from being held liable for content users post on their platforms. Even though FOSTA-SESTA has been a disaster, it hasn’t stopped Congress from considering other efforts to tamper with Section 230. Experts warn that currently proposed legislation aimed at changing Section 230 would cripple small websites ranging from Wikipedia to your favorite blogger, yet do little to restrict misinformation on tech giants like Facebook.
All of this is to say that Congress really needs to carefully examine the effects of FOSTA-SESTA before it starts playing around with further changes to Section 230. What’s at stake is not only the safety of vulnerable women but the future of the internet and everyone’s freedom of speech.
This blog is also posted on medium.com.
