|
|
|
|
|
by strogonoff
1763 days ago
|
|
> This is the kind of article that tries to dish up dozens of random allegations, intermixing them in strange ways, hoping that what sticks with the reader is a general sense of wrong-doing. Literally the first paragraph is the smoking gun: > Internal documents, leaked to BBC News, reveal that OnlyFans allows moderators to give multiple warnings to accounts that post illegal content on its online platform before deciding to close them. I.e., they literally allowed their users to post illegal stuff (apparently including CSAM, according to the guy from US Homeland Security they quote?) and keep making money, rather than reporting such cases. The rest is secondary. BBC editors are actually usually good at applying the inverted pyramid principle. |
|
So I am not seeing anything to support your claim that:
> they literally allowed their users to post illegal stuff (apparently including CSAM, according to the guy from US Homeland Security they quote)
The homeland security agent also does not appear to ever say that onlyfans intentionally allows such content. It seems his only contribution to the article is the observation that a large volume of CSAM he sees on other sites appear to originate on onlyfans. This is the entire section of the article which mentions him.
> Special agent Austin Berrier, from US Homeland Security, specialises in investigating child exploitation online. He estimates he finds between 20-30 child abuse images a week which he says have clearly originated on OnlyFans. He says every internet forum he has visited as part of his investigations in the past six months or so, has included child abuse images from OnlyFans. Most of them are videos that were live streamed on the site. In some of them, children are receiving direction - he says.
> "It's out there, it's all over the place and it's being widely traded."