Alex Hern

Dispatches from the front line of the internet

Syndicate contentRSS

Reddit blocks Gawker in defence of its right to be really, really creepy

Links from Gawker are banned from /r/politics, after journalist threatens to reveal the identity of the man running Reddit's "creepshots", "beatingwomen" and "jailbait" forums.

The front page of r/politics
The front page of r/politics

Links from the Gawker network of sites have been banned from the Reddit US Politics sub-forum, r/politics. The ban was instigated by a moderator after a Gawker.com journalist, Adrian Chen, apparently threatened to expose the real-life identity of redditor violentacrez, the creator of r/jailbait and r/creepshots. These two sub-forums, or "subreddits" were dedicated to, respectively, sexualised pictures of under-18s and sexualised pictures of women – frequently also under-age – taken in public without their knowledge or consent.

Both subreddits have since been deleted. The first went in a cull of similarly paedophilic subreddits in August last year, which also took down r/teen_girls and r/jailbaitgw ("gone wild", as in "girls gone wild"). The second was made private and then deleted due to the fallout from Chen's investigation.

According to leaked chatlogs, Chen was planning to reveal the real name of violentacrez, and approached him – because come on, it's a he – for comment. That sparked panic behind the scenes, and eventually prompted violentacrez to delete his account.

Reddit's attitude to free speech is a complex one. The extreme laissez-fair attitude of reddit's owners and administrators (the site is owned by Condé Nast, which doesn't interfere in the day-to-day management, and similarly the site administrators typically refuse to police any sub-forums) means that replacements for r/creepshots will likely spring up again, albeit more underground. Indeed, r/creepyshots was started then closed within a day. The ability of any redditor to create any subreddit they want, without the site's administration getting involved, is fiercely protected by the community, and that has led to subreddits focused on topics ranging from marijuana use and My-Little-Pony-themed pornography to beating women (also moderated by violentacrez) and, until yesterday, creepshots.

The moderators of the r/politics subreddit apparently consider Chen's attempt to find out more about violentacrez – a practice known as doxxing – to be in violation of this covenant. They write:

As moderators, we feel that this type of behavior is completely intolerable. We volunteer our time on Reddit to make it a better place for the users, and should not be harassed and threatened for that. We should all be afraid of the threat of having our personal information investigated and spread around the internet if someone disagrees with you. Reddit prides itself on having a subreddit for everything, and no matter how much anyone may disapprove of what another user subscribes to, that is never a reason to threaten them. [emphasis original]

It is important to note that the action is taken only by the moderators of r/politics, and not reddit as a whole. Nonetheless, r/politics is an extremely busy subreddit, one of the defaults to which all new redditors are subscribed, and has almost two million subscribed readers, and likely an order of magnitude more who read without subscribing. Of the last 23 gawker.com links posted to reddit, five went to r/politics.

The whole affair has an extra level of irony, because in hoping to post online publicly available information against violentacrez wishes, Chen was doing exactly the same thing which violentacrez and other moderators of r/creepshots claimed was legal and ethical. By requiring that all photos be taken in a public area – and, after a public outcry, banning photos taken in schools or featuring under-18-year-olds – they hoped to stay on the right side of the law. Even then, however, the rules were regularly flouted, with a de facto "don't ask, don't tell" policy about location and age of the subjects of the photos.

Whether or not Chen publishes the violentacrez "outing", a group of anonymous sleuths tried to take the same idea further. A now-deleted tumblr, predditors, linked reddit usernames to real people. One user, for example, had the same username on reddit.com and music site last.fm, and the last.fm profile contained a link to his Facebook page. Cross-referencing comments about his age, university and hometown allowed the connection to be confirmed, and meant that the blog could put a name and a face to comments like "NIGGERS GET THE KNIFE" and submissions like "a gallery of my personal collection of shorts, thongs, and ass".

Jezebel interviewed the woman behind predditors, who argued that:

CreepShots is a gateway drug to more dangerous hobbies. Fetishizing non-consent "indicates [that CreepShots posters] don't view women as people, and most will not be satisfied with just that level of violation," she said. "I want to make sure that the people around these men know what they're doing so they can reap social, professional, or legal consequences, and possibly save women from future sexual assault. These men are dangerous."

Whether or not she's right, the site is certainly incredibly creepy, and it's hard to feel too sorry for men merely getting a taste of their own medicine. But as this debate has spilled over into the more mainstream areas of the site, Reddit risks becoming increasingly associated with defending the rights of its users to post jailbait and creepshots in the minds of the public. 

Update

Tumblr has reinstated the Predditors blog, and tells me that:

This blog was mistakenly suspended under the impression that it was revealing private, rather than publicly-available, information. We are restoring the blog.

The (anonymous) administrator of the blog itself appears to have set a password on it, however, putting a lid on how far it can go.

74 comments

tyciol's picture

"it's hard to feel too sorry for men merely getting a taste of their own medicine"

Wow Alex, pretty gender-specific, the misandry movement sucked ya in eh? =/

Here's the problem with your statement: getting dox'd isn't the same medicine as having pics spread around. They're entirely different things.

Having pictures spread around is potentially embarassing, but not life-threatening.

Telling someone Person A is a villainous child predator, and then giving them a name, face, job, address, or whatever other contact info... that's targetting someone for assassination.

These image-sharing subreddits were not (AFAIK) posting names and addresses along with girl's photos. They were presented as anonymous individuals. That means this did not put them in harm's way.

This is not the same bowl of soup, and I think you know that.

Andrea A Johnson's picture

It's so lucky for me to find your blog! So great! Just one suggestion: It will be better and easier to follow if your blog can offer rrs subscription service.

LilooKipt's picture

Well... Want get the xrumer 7.5.31
Or maybe for cash. Anybody sell? I can pay with cash!

Hope for answer

Mr. Pharmacist 's picture

Calling it "creepshots" was a bad idea, they should have called it "candid pics" or something that sounds a bit more innocent.

EpiGen's picture

Excuse me?

Thinking in ways to defend people preying on minors for sexual means. I wonder which side you're supporting. These people aren't innocent.

Biorage's picture

Excuse me?

Thinking in ways to defend people preying on minors for sexual means. I wonder which side you're supporting. These people aren't innocent.

Mr. Pharmacist 's picture

Ambiguous amn't I? Well you have to understand that they were/are mostly kids themselves that were just reposting pictures from facebook (or so I'm told). No laws were broken by Brutsch as far as I know, I just think using "creep" in the title was bad move on his part.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

New statesman7's picture

That's not what it is - creep shots are pictures of women secretly taken in public places. That's the whole point, thats what the "creep" part is - you didn't copy it from their facebook, you creepily took a picture of their ass while standing behind in the grocery-check out line. It is literally the whole point, is to take their picture without them knowing. That's also why the chicks don't know they're on the website.

Mr. Pharmacist 's picture

If you search for ""how to disable camera sound"" in a popular search engine there are only about 19100 results, so very few people would actually do that. Also the women probably wouldn't know if it was them or not so this protects their anonymity.

Siobhan's picture

If your logic is "There aren't many search results for turning off camera sound, therefore people aren't taking creepshots"...then it's pretty poor logic.

Also, just because the women's anonymity was "protected" doesn't mean a thing - the point is that women shouldn't have to walk around in public worrying that some fuckstick is going to take a photo of their ass and post it on the internet for other fucksticks to gawk at. Whether or not they know the photo is of them is irrelevant.

Siobhan's picture

If your logic is "There aren't many search results for turning off camera sound, therefore people aren't taking creepshots"...then it's pretty poor logic.

Also, just because the women's anonymity was "protected" doesn't mean a thing - the point is that women shouldn't have to walk around in public worrying that some fuckstick is going to take a photo of their ass and post it on the internet for other fucksticks to gawk at. Whether or not they know the photo is of them is irrelevant.

AnonymousA's picture

There needs to be a reddit community devoted to outing creepy reddit moderators. That's also free speech, bitches.

sigh's picture

Promoting the sexualization of children, non-consensual interactions, and brutality against women is never okay. And before one of you "men's rights" babies whines about women sexualizing men too, I'd like to point out the fact that we live in a patriarchy. A big fat man lovin' patriarchy. So with the exception of a few individual cases, a woman will essentially never have the power to hurt a man the way men can hurt women, both socially and physically. Chen was in the right, AH is in the right, and violentacrez is a crapstain of a human who does not deserve protection from any of his own stupid actions. You do not deserve to have anonymity to continue demeaning and - watch out, I gonna use the o word - oppressing people. If you're going to bring up the immorality of exposing his identity you cannot gloss over the immorality of everything he did and supported on reddit, which is infinitely worse. I'd call Chen exposing him a necessary evil, only I don't think it was evil at all. I think it was awesome.

sigh's picture

Promoting the sexualization of children, non-consensual interactions, and brutality against women is never okay. And before one of you "men's rights" babies whines about women sexualizing men too, I'd like to point out the fact that we live in a patriarchy. A big fat man lovin' patriarchy. So with the exception of a few individual cases, a woman will essentially never have the power to hurt a man the way men can hurt women, both socially and physically. Chen was in the right, AH is in the right, and violentacrez is a crapstain of a human who does not deserve protection from any of his own stupid actions. You do not deserve to have anonymity to continue demeaning and - watch out, I gonna use the o word - oppressing people. If you're going to bring up the immorality of exposing his identity you cannot gloss over the immorality of everything he did and supported on reddit, which is infinitely worse. I'd call Chen exposing him a necessary evil, only I don't think it was evil at all. I think it was awesome.

rockidol's picture

"defence of its right to be really, really creepy"

You realize that creepy is subjective right? You might as well replace it with offensive.

Shaed's picture

Except that we are talking about people who literally identify themselves with the words creep and pervert. Are you saying it is wrong to agree with them?

Tomato's picture

Excellent article and commentary, Alex. Keep fighting the good fight! The good fight in this case: being a decent human being.

#geootrwonick[UDUDYYJJDDIY]'s picture

very good!

YouAreInsane's picture

We will pave the roads with the skulls of you traitor feminist males.

h.hall's picture

Thank you for reminding me why I avoid Reddit. *My god, it's full of creeps.*

Anon177777777's picture

Not all reddit is full of creeps. Stop generalising.

Gauge's picture

As a redditor, I have to say, yes it absolutely is.

Chowdah's picture

I don't know which I despise more Jezebel, Reddit, Gawker, or beating women. It's a sick sick world.

Pavlova's picture

Seriously I am getting more depressed every day.
Yesterday it's slut dropping, today it's the right to publicly violate anonymously.

What the hell is wrong with men?

Seriously. There is something isn't there.

Alex Hern can suck my balls's picture

Great work

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky's picture

Seems like a court order or two would straighten this whole mess out pretty quickly. We've been here before - Craigslist and sexual solicitation, MegaUpload, and of course Facebook.

Sha's picture

I didn't know you until today, but I'll be sure to follow you from now on. Great, succinct, informative piece about scumbags on the internet, on scumbags response to being pointed out for being scumbags, and excellent defense of your piece in the comments section.

I think it's pretty clear that a lot of these angry responses are coming from the same type of scumbags you described in your piece. I'm interested to know if you've ever gotten so many heated, antagonistic replies to your work prior to this.

SamIAM's picture

Seems a lot of Redditors are flocking over here to continue the defense.

EvilPundit's picture

I've learned not to trust the New Statesman when it comes to gender issues. Its biased articles always toe the feminist propaganda line by leaving out some information and slanting what's left.

This sort of "reporting" is what makes the traditional media increasingly less relevant.

aychrist's picture

Oh please, do tell what the "other side" of surreptitiously photographing women and posting it for creeps is. No please, tell us all about how it is totally acceptable to make women fear even leaving their homes because they might end up on the internet branded "sluts" or "whores."

Lum's picture

Funny, where's your article on TubeCrush or VandyManCandy on tumblr or the myriad of other creeper sites run by and for women... Oh, yeah, you conveniently ignore those don't you. Double standards are the total norm these days. Can't expect anything honest from hack fake Internet "journalists".

Spills's picture

Wow it seems the only "issue" is of the girls that are under 18 rather than all of the women having their privacy violated??!

Jordan's picture

Well hate to break it to you, but when you are in the public domain you can take all the pictures you want.... lol @ the notion privacy walking around on the street...

lauraroslin's picture

It's not the notion of LEGAL privacy. It's the notion of personal privacy--personal dignity. Just because something isn't (and shouldn't) be outlawed, like taking pictures of anything you want in public, doesn't mean it's OK, doesn't mean it's not creepy and gross, and doesn't mean it's not a violation. There are plenty of gross, wrong, and invasive things that aren't outlawed; the law isn't an arbiter of what is right. So the first amendment defense may be perfectly valid in a legal court, but doesn't work in the court of public opinion--nor should it.

Jade's picture

Cannot agree with you more. Legal? Yeah. Ethical? Moral? Absolutely not! Creepy as all get-out!

Emualynk's picture

Actually, that's not true. If you're the subject of the picture then you have to be informed of it. You can't take pictures of people without their consent.
If however it's a photo about a different event and you just happen to be here then yeah it's alright.

AccidentalZen's picture

You are completely wrong. You do not have to be informed of having your image recorded in public, ever. The only time you must be informed is if the image is going to be used commercially, then you own the publishing rights to your image. Try doing basic research before posting misinformation.

Patrick Thornton's picture

This is just blatantly false. Please stop spreading false information.

Taking pictures in public is protected under the First Amendment to the Constitution and is considered a form of speech. In addition, the Fourth Amendment to the Constitution has been interrupted to mean that people do not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in public.

There are, however, restrictions on what you can do with that photo after you take it with regards to making money off of someone's likeness.

Pleasethinkforjustonesecond's picture

Thank you.

Creepy? Yes. Privacy violated, I think not.

SomeChick's picture

The way I see it, this isn't about the r/ pages at all...maybe I'm just looking at what appears to be a gaping hole between the lines, but I'm totally in support of reddit. If Adrien was THAT upset ... well, I know what I'd do...and it's not manipulate a situation into a headline we'll all forget about in a week.

Latest tweets