Laughing at Texas.

Sad indeed. Across the escort blogosphere, we have talked numerous times about the bullshit studies of mass hookers and kids being sold into prostitution. Here I discussed the wolf crying syndrome and the effects that the bogus and inflated numbers would have when it came to pass that it was all a big lie. Maggie McNeill discussed the circle jerk circus here. We all laughed. Ok now the village is laughing. I mean come on, it’s one thing to be able to laugh at ourselves but when everyone else starts laughing while pointing their fingers at us it becomes a little embarrassing. Here is a few news stories that popped up in my alerts:

Super Bowl Was Yet Another Chance for Bogus Numbers

Wall of Shame

Women’s Funding Network Sex Trafficking Study Is Junk Science, Schapiro Group data wasn’t questioned by mainstream media.

None of the media that published Richardson’s astonishing numbers bothered to examine the study at the heart of her claim. If they had, they would have found what we did after asking independent experts to examine the research: It’s junk science.

After all, the numbers are guesses. The data are based merely on looking at photos on the Internet. There is no science.

It’s now clear it used fake data to deceive the media and lie to Congress. And it was all done to score free publicity and a wealth of public funding.

“We pitch it the way we think you’re going to read it and pick up on it,” says Kaffie McCullough, the director of Atlanta-based antiprostitution group A Future Not a Past.

“How do you know when the pictures were taken?” he asks. “It’s not illegal for an 18-year-old who’s selling sex to put up a picture of herself from when she was 16.” (Good point)

Maggie (and anyone else out there who wants a good laugh, you have got to read what independent researchers who were asked to evaluate this study said. I mean, I know we debunked it but there are some statement that are just laugh out loud funny. This one for example:

“This is a logical fallacy,” says Steve Doig, the Knight Chair in Journalism at Arizona State University, who reviewed the study at our request. “Consider this analogy: Imagine that 100 people were shown pictures of various automobiles and asked to identify the make, and that 38 percent of the time people misidentified Fords as Chevrolets. Using the Schapiro logic, this would mean that 38 percent of Fords on the street actually are Chevys.”

So the reporter/journalist/author actually went to the Shapiro group to ask questions! Good for them! Check out these responses:

When we asked Schapiro and Rusty Parker, the leader of the classifieds study, to fill in some of the missing pieces in their methodology, they had a hard time coming up with straight answers. In fact, Parker couldn’t remember key information about how he constructed the study. When asked where he got the sample pictures used to calibrate the all-important 38 percent error rate, he wasn’t sure. “It was a while back,” he says. “I forget exactly where we got them from.”

Parker was equally fuzzy on how the researchers knew the ages of the people pictured in the control group. “Um … I’m afraid I do not remember,” he says.

Schapiro beat a hasty retreat, saying the study results shouldn’t be read as actual incidents of prostitution. “We’re the first to tell you, this is not a precise count of the number of girls being prostituted,” she says. “We make no bones about that.”Of course, a precise count of the number of girls being prostituted is exactly what the statistics are being presented as in the media, in press releases, and in Schapiro’s own study. When this is pointed out, she reverses herself: “Well, yes, these are specific numbers. … And yes, they are hard numbers, and they are numbers that we stand completely behind.”

Huh?

We have been caught with our chaps down. Tsk tsk. The government is not going to be as willing to hand out research and aid funding now because bogus reports have been exposed. Our government can barely afford a pot to piss in (and in fact will have to borrow the money for said pot) so they really need to pick and choose carefully what causes are worthy of government funding. If they continually rely on facts and figures in reports that are known to be full of holes, propaganda, and hysteria the public WILL eventually get pissed about our taxpayer money being spent on lies. I know I already am and you should be to.

 

Advertisements

2 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

2 responses to “Laughing at Texas.

  1. I wish Pete Kotz had asked me about the Schapiro Group studies when he interviewed me in January; this might’ve gotten out sooner. Well, I just hope more reporters start digging into this stuff; it’ll be the only way to end the witch-hunt.

  2. cch

    Sadder still…

    In my opinion, Texans generally don’t care what Yankees (people not from Texas) think.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s