Tag: Match.com

Posted on

Regulation and the Dating Industry. What’s out there?

In the rapid growing industry of online dating, concerns should also be growing over the lack of regulation for the entire industry. The worries published about the lack of responsibility taken by the companies in this industry have been inking the press for years yet nothing seems to have been done?

As part of my campaign moving forward, my goal is to get legal regulation (not self regulation) for all current and future dating platforms to truly protect the users. This should include non-UK based companies legally obliged to comply with our laws if operating a service within our country (even if parts of that service are processed outside the UK). What industry specific regulation is there?

First, I needed to work out what regulation if any was actually in place at the moment.

Here is what I found.

There are 3 general cross industry laws that apply to all companies. These are:

These apply to the dating companies too. However, the ODA claim they decided to take a closer look and define these for their industry:

The Online Dating Association is an organisation founded by 13 leading ‘players’ (all voluntary). They claim to want to take responsibility for the ONLINE dating sector to protect consumers. Members that follow their ‘ODA Code’ of Conduct can display the ODA logo on their dating platform.

The ODA states:

The Online Dating Association Code of Practice (“ODA Code”) is binding on members of the Association. It sets out what is expected of members under a series of key headings:

  •   General Rules (unregulated)
  •   Honest and clear communications (Marketing and Advertising)
  •   Protection of the user (software used for money fraud scammers, operating internationally in the main, like Scamalytics)
  •   Delivering to meet user needs (Consumer Rights)
  •   Protecting data and privacy (Data Protection)

‘The feeling within the sector in the last few years was that it was time we took some collective responsibility for our market and our users as well as exercising responsibility as individual service providers.

In summer 2013 a group of dating site providers took and acted on the advice that this is a market where players should not rely solely on the framework of privacy, data and consumer law to protect the market and those in it.

The law and regulations applicable to the sector clearly matter and should be respected. But laws and regulations have to deal with the generality of industries and businesses to which they apply and our statutory regulators are often thinly stretched and not able to do much other than react to consumer harms.

We, like other sectors, saw the need to give regulations “life” and to draw out, highlight and give meaning to those that particularly matter for online daters. The ODA aims to pre-empt and prevent problems by testing members against our Code of Practice before they can come into membership – and afterwards.’

They go on to state that:

‘Our Code of Practice and our advice for the public on the best and safe use of services was published in December 2013. The Code is short, simple and outcomes-based. It focuses on the core issues for users: the clarity and honesty of the services offered, the protection of user’s personal information, the proper operation of services and the advice and help we give users to make dating as enjoyable and safe as possible.’

Isn’t this simply the current ‘must have’ legal regulation across all industries with some ‘advice tips’ thrown in?

Back in 2013 when the ODA was founded it claimed that:

The Code which will help ensure compliance to existing laws and regulations and it will set the bar higher.  It will be anchored in a set of principles, with supporting rules and guidance:

* Being honest and clear in what you offer (Advertising)
* Meeting expectations and deliver what you promise (Consumer)
* Protecting people’s data and their privacy (Data)
* Protecting our users from harm, deception and loss

So here too, the first 3 standards are ‘general industry’ regulations.

But the 4th claims protection from harm, deception and loss. The ODA haven’t replied to my email on which ‘regulation’ this actually is, other than mere ‘advice for dating safely online‘ and what consequences are in place to the members who don’t comply? A news article on How to stay safe when online dating gives 6 key points of how to stay safe but the DateGreat:DateSafe link is broken.

All I can do is find this in their code. The part of the code that details this is here:

Section 3. Protection of the User (these sub clauses are pertinent to fake profiles)

3.4 ODA Members must have policies and arrangements to prevent misuse or inappropriate use of their services.

3.5 ODA Members must ensure all User profiles are checked and that appropriate arrangements exist to detect fraudulent or misleading Profiles and inappropriate content and to remove any such Profiles from the site as soon as possible.

3.6 ODA Members must not themselves create fake Profiles or knowingly allow Users or any other party to create and post fake Profiles. If ODA Members create Profiles for testing or other administrative purposes this should be done in ways that ensure Users are in no doubt over the nature of such Profiles.

I thought I would test out a company affiliated with the ODA and it’s ‘ODA Code’- Match.com

I decided to set up a fak(ish) profile. What hurdles would I come across? What verification was there in place to ensure the information I was giving them was correct? (3.4 & 3.5)

The results. I used a rarely used email of mine from years ago that required no verification. I used the name Lisa, I copied and pasted a photo from the internet and used that as the profile picture. I waited while the 15 minutes passed for the photo to be verified, mean while I ticked the boxes they wanted about my preferences and hair colour and length. Obviously more important than if I was actually real, married or a convicted rapist. Before the photo had even passed the process I was able to browse the online sea of faces. I clicked the email about activating my account and BINGO! complete. It’s that easy. 2 minutes later the email arrived to say the photo had been verified. Fak(ish) profile success (I then suspended the account).

What did Match.com do that followed the rules and ‘high standards’ set out by the ODA? Nothing. In fact recent research revealed that Match.com came joint second for crimes probed by Durham constabulary between 2011 and 2016.

Their response to my query,  regarding these principles is that it isn’t their responsibility because they state in their T&C’s that the user must provide accurate information. They simply store that information correctly and accurately.

Match also featured heavily in the recent Channel 5 documentary ‘Murder on the Internet’ An almost identical response was received by them from Match when questioned.

So, I’m a rapist who wants to groom and abuse women using their Website as my sweetshop. I can fill in anything I like on that profile. NOTHING is checked. What a great way to exploit women. The sad facts are that although this does happen to men too, statistics show that women are exploited at a ratio of approximately 80:20 the police say sexual abuse cases are more 85:15.

Just recently the dating website secondwife.com has been publicised in the Daily Mail  and has made headlines as it blatantly flouts U.K. law promoting bigamy. What is being done to stop this? Nothing. The man who runs the website set this up in Dubai where Sharia Law exists. However, this is being allowed to operate in our country too. Not only does this flout U.K. law but is putting women and girls at risk of abusive and DV relationships and completely undermines the decades of hard work to secure equality for women. This site also claims FULL VERIFICATION -no fake profiles as a feature. HOW exactly?

The police say:

‘Pretty much all other businesses have a regulation / compliance function or some kind of consortium that they have to address if things go wrong. But not the dating sites.

The ODA do encourage good practice and seek to push for good simple alert mechanisms and we are pushing for a cross board date safe kite mark on all sites.

But as you know, the sites operate globally, the rewards are good for the big players and they don’t want to alarm potential customers by swamping the adventure with law enforcement based warnings and jargon.’

Andrew, CE of the ODA did kindly take an hour to chat on the phone with me (after several emails over the months) where I tried to impress the importance of getting better verification in place across the industry. I stressed I realise this is not an overnight issue to be solved and that I wanted knowledge to enable me to put viable suggestions that work for everyone (as they are businesses) to take forward. I came away with the understanding that I would be invited to meet with their members when the occasions occur, but they fell at the first hurdle and no response to my email asking why they didn’t feel it appropriate for the meeting just gone. Mmmmm.

I wonder if the law changed to say that this Industry could be sued for negligence when things go wrong, if a ‘verification process’ would materialise?

Amber Rudd is currently pushing for better security online to help combat  terrorism. Dating websites are a great place to begin the process of radicalisation if the criminals choose to use them on vulnerable people. But why should it stop there? Money fraud aside, women are being exploited by men still in this decade for self gratification and yes the parameters of this exploitation online are vast. Too many of societie’s attitudes are that this behaviour is ok. Why is it ok? It is becoming normalised because the police are choosing not to put forward cases that mean they have to work at it, cases that are not black and white-to keep their stats good. Cases that now involve the use of technology are moving in the right direction with fake profiles and revenge porn and trolling legislation (more still needs to be done as far as the convictions taking place) but the  judicial system is rarely faced with unusual or different cases as the CPS don’t let them, making this appear publicly that this exploitation ok and doable. Moving backwards in equality? Very much.

 

 

 

Posted on

The Personal Catfish

What is a Personal Catfish?

It seems these Catfish are the lesser known of their type in the UK, as financial fraudsters using Catfishing as a platform for their ill gotten gains, get much more press space and in some cases can be prosecuted if the sums of money are large enough under the Fraud Act 2006. Most warnings on dating websites and other are geared towards these financial fraudsters and their tactics but who is to say that the hurt and after math of a Personal Catfish is any less devastating? Despite this imbalance, the name Catfish came from these very same personal online romance scam Catfish. They can still be sub divided.

Unlike the Catfish of the financial fraud world, these catfish have a more ‘personal’ motive for doing what they do.

The grooming technique is the same for all Catfish, however some may be more experienced and efficient at it.

The Personal Catfish

It would be hard to believe that most people have not come across the term Catfish by now but where did this term come from? You can find out on my What is a ‘Catfish’? post. I’m sure there are many more categories but for the purpose here I’m subdividing into these:

  • self esteem
  • revenge
  • jokes
  • cyber sex
  • the offline Personal Catfish

Nev’s show has exposed some of these categories.

Self Esteem

As has been seen in numerous episodes of  ‘Catfish’, one of the motivators of hiding behind a fake profile and identity is the self esteem issues of the Catfish. Often, these individuals feel they are not worthy of having a relationship with ‘someone as handsome/beautiful’ as their target. They do not have the confidence to approach someone in person. So, they fulfil their fantasies online as someone else. Most of the time when uncovered, they can see the hurt they have caused, stringing out their target for years sometimes, making excuses as to why they can’t meet but hoping the romance can remain. Sometimes real feelings are reciprocated on both sides but in the main, the deceit, lies and broken trust means that the ‘relationship’ is over.

Revenge

These are nasty. Aiming at specific targets, these Catfish are only interested in one thing. Their purpose is to bestow hurt and humiliation on someone they feel has done them a wrong first. Maybe it was rejection in the relationship, maybe it is a family member or close friend that feels they have been betrayed in the past.

Jokes

As above, this form of Catfishing is equally nasty. Maybe known or unknown to the target, some individuals are simply bored and use this behaviour as a form of amusement and entertainment. Other people’s hurt doesn’t feature in their social skill set and they don’t see what they are doing as a problem. It’s just a bit of fun right? No it’s not.

Cyber Sex

This is where our Personal Catfish are upping the ante.

Using the same grooming techniques and love bombing, these Catfish may simply be miscreant versions of the revenge or joke Catfish, asking for intimate pictures/videos as part of the ‘joke’ which will add to the humiliation when the duping is exposed and worse as leverage for part of their game.  However, some set out to use this added level of  reprehensible behaviour as a way of getting their own needs met. Much like the behaviour of a paedophile who uses a fake profile to lure children into sexually explicit situations, these Catfish are after their own ‘gallery’ of images/videos from unsuspecting women/men.

Creating an online relationship gives an added level of power and excitement for the Catfish against simply looking at published pictures as they get to control and manipulate the target to ‘perform’ at their will under the guise of a relationship. Only if these pictures or videos are published online by the Catfish would our current legal system potentially prosecute under ‘revenge porn’ legislation. You can read about this here. If they simply ghost you when they have done with you or you find them out to be a fraud, the legal system will not touch them.

This kind of online emotional and or sexual abuse is not OK. Someone who sets up a fake profile with the intent to abuse and cause repeated emotional harm which may lead to physical harm is a bully. You can read more at the comprehensive Cyberbullying Research Centre  site here.

The offline Personal Catfish

So here is mine. Potentially the ‘new breed’ of Catfish? This one dares to come out of the ‘water’ to pursue his fictional relationship in the flesh.

After building trust over a period of time (if that’s what they read the situation as needing with that particular target) and using the love bombing technique to get you hooked and attached, these Personal Catfish make the move to meet face to face. Setting expectations of patterns as far as work time and parental responsibilities, also came in these early stages. With most of his targets, ours had a tried and tested plan of getting ‘you to to invite him’ for coffee as an initial meeting. This was something several of us experienced from him. Under the cover of their ‘fake identity’ this Catfish type behaves in the way any other person starting a relationship may do (as is the preference of life style to that particular couple). The cover of a job that takes them away regularly is usual it seems, so they can be in multiple relationships at once.

Whether the Catfish themself is actually single or married, one thing is for sure, any promises they make you, about wanting a committed, longterm and loving relationship are lies. Their only motive for doing this is to lull you into a false sense of security about them so that they have control over you to get what they want.

My offline personal Catfish had the intention of sticking around for a while. He wasn’t interested in creating this fantasy life for one night stands. He wanted the ‘illusion of the relationship’ he said he wanted as his fake self. That way he got the best from me/us. It also meant he had to be thorough and clever in creating his back story and have things to make his fake life seem real to us.

Not only did my Catfish have a fake Face Book account, which had a network of friends within it and was used to portray things he spoke about in his fake life i.e likes for business, music, tv shows he wanted you to think he liked the same as you (all part of the grooming process), he also had fake emails, Skype accounts and several other Social media platforms to back up his fake identity. He also had a dedicated phone for his alias. Were his actions premeditated? In every way. Did his life seem real? Very much. But he had been doing this for over a decade with this alias. He was very experienced in his execution and had evolved his practise over time. His real job meant he was away from his wife and family all week in London, only returning at weekends where even then he did have periods of time in Europe as he claimed he did regularly under his alias.

Mine also used ‘sob stories’ with all of us. He constantly had you feeling sorry for him. This was all part of the emotional manipulation. It meant we didn’t add to his stressful situation and portrayal of a good man going through difficult times.

What does this say about the person behind the Catfish?

Who is worse? I’m not deliberating on the outcome for the victim here, as financial fraud catfish victims will have 2 lots of trauma to deal with in their scenario (emotional and potentially large sums financially),  but the type of person that decides to ‘Catfish’? The catfish themselves can literally be anyone. Married, single, male or female posing as anyone they wish to be.

The financial fraudsters of the African scams (and similar) are doing this because they live such deprived lives, they see ‘Westerners’ as rich and privileged. I’m not making excuses, it’s wrong full stop but just observing the back grounds.  The Personal Catfish isn’t seeking money as their motivation. They are not all ‘Walter Mitty’ type characters, they can have it all, and simply exploit vulnerable people because they think it’s their right and they want more. Yet the law will only prosecute financial fraud. It’s one to think about.

Shockingly, there is virtually no research into the emotional impact on non-financial loss victims in these scenarios (particularly those that have been exploited for sexual use). Maybe with the help of those that have had similar non-financial loss experiences, we can start to do our own as a way to force the hand of the justice system to act on both counts?