For All The Talk From Hollywood About Making Sure People Get Paid, Why Doesn't It Pay Interns?

Statistical Stupidity: 95% Of All Lazy Journalists Believe That 88% Of All Homemade Porn Ends Up Online

from the that-cannot-possibly-be-true dept

Thu, Oct 25th 2012 10:22am — Timothy Geigner

We are often told that we need mega-media news organizations because they, unlike their smaller internet bretheren, are more trustworthy because they fact-check. This is a repeated premise (despite example after example after example showing that it just isn't true), which is why some folks may still be surprised when an organization like CBS can botch their reporting so horrifically. Witness their reporting of a new study put out by the Internet Watch Foundation concerning explicit images that end up on so-called parasite websites.

Eighty-eight percent of homemade pornography, including videos and still images, finds its way onto porn sites, often without the owners’ knowledge, a new study from Britain’s Internet Watch Foundation (IWF) has found.

The study analyzed more than 12,000 sexually explicit images uploaded by young people and found that the great majority of images had been stolen and published to what the organization calls, “parasite” websites.

If you read that first sentence, the one that says that 88% of all homemade pornography ends up online, and didn't immediately begin laughing at the sheer silliness of that number, you're a stronger person than I am. Now, granted, being both a horribly ugly pasty white and being, at best, mildly attractive, I'm not someone prone to taking pictures of my man-junk, nor mid-coitus. But what the hell? Eighty-eight percent? There's no way that could possibly be true.

And, of course, it isn't true. Nor is it even what the report concluded. What it actually concluded was that 88% of explicit images uploaded to the internet end up on parasitic websites. Now, that claim may still be inflated, but it isn't as outlandishly inflated as CBS made it sound. This isn't to say that major media should be 100% accurate all the time, but to claim that journalism will die if this kind of reporting goes away is the kind of over-exaggerated false claim that you would expect...well...I guess CBS to make.

So keep this story in your back pocket for the next time someone tells you how much we need mega-media news because they fact-check. Also make sure you throw some random made up statistics at that person. Hell, if they love major news media so much, there's a 43% chance that they'll believe them one-half of the time. Every time.

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Filed Under: journalism, porn, statistics

29 Comments

If you liked this post, you may also be interested in...

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

blaktron (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:31am

This suggests that the author of this study was able to find 12% MORE illicit homemade porn than the creeps actually sifting through photobucket for them. Thats actually more improbable than the 88% figure itself.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:31am

The real question is: how did a researcher's image-scraping bot do 14% better than the 'evil' image-scraping bots? You'd think they'd have a better algorithm than some researcher could make just by spending a few weeks in a computer lab.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
jupiterkansas (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:38am

What is this mega-media news organization you're talking about? Is that the thing Jon Stewart keeps making fun of? I stopped paying attention to them 15 years ago.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Duke (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:40am

What it actually concluded was that 88% of explicit images uploaded to the internet end up on parasitic websites.
From my reading of the IWF's press release it didn't even conclude this. A more accurate reading would be "88% of homemade explicit images we were able to find easily on social networks ended up on parawebsite."

Which isn't really that surprising. If the IWF can find it quite quickly, one imagines the parawebsites shouldn't find it too hard either...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Josef Anvil (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:45am

I'm unclear on the point
Ok let's assume 88% of homemade porn finds its way to porno sites. Is that bad because it's infringing copyrights? Is that bad because it's crappy porn? Is that bad because no one could find the other 12% ?

It seems that the article is upset about infringement. Damn you porn pirates. I want to make sure the actors are getting paid!!!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:47am

There's a counterpoint to all assertions 99.99 percent of the time

78% of all stats are made up on the spot
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Michael, 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:52am

Solve this problem
"88% of explicit images uploaded to the internet end up on parasitic websites"

That is a travesty. 100% of the idiots that upload explicit images of themselves deserve to have them published for everyone to see.

I, however, and far more interested in an examination of the other 12%. Why weren't these caught by the porn crawlers? I would assume that since they are actually the industry that seems to advance technology, their ability to find explicit images is WAY better than an organization that seems to think they need to tax the population to preserve the integrity of their news print.

My guess is that the crawlers rejected that 12% because it was so bad or the people were so ugly that they did not think they could monetize it. That, or they included celebrities and they are waiting for their payoff.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Oct 2012 @ 10:56am

Now to be fair these reports are 50% accurate 100% of the time.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Lord Binky, 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:09am

This is perfectly plausible and explainable

They know how approximately how many people have been making explicit images of themselves, because they've been had enough people under constant video surveillance to extrapolate that.

That or they only found 88% of what they recorded was worth putting on the internet.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Rekrul, 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:15am

This article is pointless without pictures! ;)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Kev (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:18am

Pictures or it didn't happen
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Dark Helmet (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:23am

Re:
Sadly, Mike did not allow me to take explicit images of myself for use in this article. Granted, I would figure out a way to make any nudie picture of myself so eyeball-explodingly horrifying that we'd have to release a braille (sp?) version of Techdirt as a result....but it still would have been funny....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ron (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:35am

Analysis
"The study analyzed more than 12,000 sexually explicit images uploaded by young people ..."

Where does one sign up for these studies?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
byte^me (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:38am

Re:
Really? I thought it was 83% of all stats are made up on the spot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Ikarushka (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 11:41am

Re:
Actually, if you keep reload this page, you will see a picture of DH's manly bits approximately 9 times out of 10. You just were not that lucky at your first hit.

I'm not implying that his consent was obtained though.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Oct 2012 @ 12:08pm

Re: Analysis
4chan
[ link to this | view in thread ]
angelbar (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 12:10pm

Re:
I was skeptical too.

http://imgur.com/Zehuf
[ link to this | view in thread ]
John Fenderson (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 12:10pm

People claim this?
So keep this story in your back pocket for the next time someone tells you how much we need mega-media news because they fact-check.

Wait, intelligent people actually claim this? Now, that's obscene.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 25 Oct 2012 @ 12:31pm

What site?
[ link to this | view in thread ]
ltlw0lf (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 1:22pm

Re: Re:
Thankfully, Mike did not allow me to take explicit images of myself for use in this article.

FTFY.

Though it might be kinky for Bob, AJ, and OOB to see you with the mask, sans the Blackhawk's uniform. You might even have them stalking you as much as they do Mike.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Jeff Woods (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 3:15pm

"Lies, damned lies, and statistics"
package require Tclx
echo [rand 100]% of all statistics are made up on the spot!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Grant, 25 Oct 2012 @ 8:17pm

95% of all statistics are made up on the spot.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 8:42pm

Re: Re:
It would also drastically increase percentage.

88% + your 100% averages 94% of all porn...
[ link to this | view in thread ]
btrussell (profile), 25 Oct 2012 @ 8:43pm

Re: Re:
I also saw feminine bytes.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Oct 2012 @ 3:39am

Re: Re:
No its more like 94.52%
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Anonymous Coward, 26 Oct 2012 @ 3:40am

Re:
60% of the time it works every time.....
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Niall (profile), 26 Oct 2012 @ 6:17am

Re: Re:
You nude + braille version that needs touching leads to some *very* disturbing images! :)
[ link to this | view in thread ]
slick8086, 26 Oct 2012 @ 10:28am

not quite right.
> Eighty-eight percent? There's no way that could possibly be true.

Actually there is no way to know. How could they know how much home made porno there is? No survey could be reliable. Sex and pornography are something that most Americans lie about.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Get off my cyber-lawn! (profile), 26 Oct 2012 @ 1:50pm

There are FOUR kinds of liars
Liars, Damn Liars, and Statisticians.
[ link to this | view in thread ]