Nieman Foundation at Harvard
HOME
          
LATEST STORY
Don’t click this: When should news organizations use “nofollow” links?
ABOUT                    SUBSCRIBE
Oct. 7, 2013, 11:28 a.m.
LINK: www.nytimes.com  ➚   |   Posted by: Joshua Benton   |   October 7, 2013

Over the weekend, the Times published David Segal’s look at mugshot sites — the ones that gather publicly available mugshots from around the country, publish them with the arrestee’s name and charge attached, and then offer to take them down for the right amount of money. (They’re pretty evil.)

We’ve written about them before, because however close their activities may seem to blackmail, they also intersect with traditional journalism — which, after all, publishes mugshots all the time, albeit without the hundred-bucks-to-clear-your-name-in-Google twist. Some legal approaches to pushing back against mugshot sites also threaten journalism.

Anyway, aside from producing a good story, Segal’s poking around seems to have resulted in some action, from Google (whose search algorithms have previously given a certain prominence to mugshot sites) to the payment processors through whom the money flows:

[Google introduced an] algorithm change sometime on Thursday. The effects were immediate: on Friday, two mug shots of Janese Trimaldi, which had appeared prominently in an image search, were no longer on the first page. For owners of these sites, this is very bad news…

Asked two weeks ago about its policies on mug-shot sites, officials at MasterCard spent a few days examining the issue, and came back with an answer. “We looked at the activity and found it repugnant,” said Noah Hanft, general counsel with the company. MasterCard executives contacted the merchant bank that handles all of its largest mug-shot site accounts and urged it to drop them as customers. “They are in the process of terminating them,” Mr. Hanft said.

PayPal came back with a similar response after being contacted for this article…

American Express and Discover were contacted on Monday and, two days later, both companies said they were severing relationships with mug-shot sites…

On Friday, Mr. D’Antonio of JustMugshots was coping with a drop in Web traffic and, at the same time, determining which financial services companies would do business with him. “We’re still trying to wrap our heads around this,” he said.

Some aren’t completely at ease with search engines and payment companies holding such sway over a website’s success or failure:

I take that point, but I’d also note that Google and MasterCard making these moves is in many ways preferable to misguided legislative attempts that could hurt legitimate journalism as well.

Show tags Show comments / Leave a comment
 
Join the 50,000 who get the freshest future-of-journalism news in our daily email.
Don’t click this: When should news organizations use “nofollow” links?
Plus, a new free course for online fact-checking taught via workspace app Notion.
One potential route to flagging fake news at scale: Linguistic analysis
It’s not perfect, but legitimate and faked news articles use language differently in ways that can be detected algorithmically: “On average, fake news articles use more expressions that are common in hate speech, as well as words related to sex, death, and anxiety.”
Finally, Instagram is getting fact-checked (in a limited way and just in the U.S., for now)
“The potential to prevent harm is high here, particularly with the widespread existence of health misinformation on the platform.”