Okay. Thank you for that.
I just need to really clarify this because we have a very simple mandate, which is the issue of whether or not images are being used without consent. That was what we started with, and that was where we were at. We have received many briefs, and many briefs from across the political spectrum, as is people's right. Whether or not somebody doesn't like Madonna is not really something I'm interested in. I'm interested in whether the laws that we have are sufficient for people who are non-consensual.
This study did come from The New York Times article. I don't think it helps to say that it's fabricated news or that it's some kind of right-wing agenda. It was a very powerful question. Why would someone who was a child whose images were being exploited...? Why would those be put on Pornhub and you couldn't take them down? That was a straightforward question. We thought those answers would be pretty straightforward to get.
I spoke with a Pornhub executive who said to me that he was very flummoxed by the refusal of Pornhub to deal with these. Apparently, he said, it's a very small percentage of their whole business model. They have a very profitable business model. I have absolutely no interest in the pornography industry, whether it's added to.... It's not my issue. My issue is this: Why was Serena Fleites' video up there and she couldn't get it down? She was not a youth working in the sex industry; she was a child, period.
We have laws that should affect that. The issue of sex workers' rights and working in a safe space is all, I think, perfectly legitimate and fair to discuss, but what I'm looking at in terms of the ethics committee is whether or not we have protections for those for whom it wasn't consensual.
When the RCMP told a survivor that they had no mandate to deal with taking down her sexual assault video because the terms and conditions of Pornhub protected them, I found that to be ridiculous because the consent that was given was by her sexual assaulter, not by her. You guys might think that these are stories that are conflating and upsetting and attempting to turn peoples' minds.... To me, this is what I heard from witnesses. I think if a survivor called the RCMP and said, “Listen. This was non-consensual”.... Nobody believes survivors. They go to the police all the time. Sex workers, they don't believe.
I want to know that the laws that exist in this land for something like that.... They have to be pretty straightforward. Pornhub is an immensely powerful company. They have all the tools in the world. When these issues are raised—and they are raised about Pornhub because it is a Canadian company.... We can deal with them. We can't deal with all the others, and it's not our mandate to deal with all of the others. However, when it's an issue of someone who says, “This was an assault on me, and it's up there on the site,” it should be fairly straightforward to have that taken down without impinging on any of the rights of sex workers. I think that's a pretty straightforward thing to do.
