The adult movie business is a multibillion-dollar industry that is so powerful that it—not mainstream Hollywood—determines what technologies and trends in filmmaking and distribution make it in the marketplace. And with the Internet it is seemingly everywhere (and any parent who doesn’t closely monitor their sons’ usage of the Net is making a big mistake.)
But apart from the Net, the most lucrative locale for the purveyors of smut is hotel rooms, and a coalition of activists is demanding the hotel industry to cut their ties to it. Unfortunately, like a crack addict on the street, I doubt the hoteliers will be able to tear themselves away from such a profit center.
A coalition of 13 conservative groups—including the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America—took out full-page ads in some editions of USA Today earlier this month urging the Justice Department and FBI to investigate whether some of the pay-per-view movies widely available in hotels violate federal and state obscenity laws. The coalition also is trying to draw attention to CleanHotels.com, a directory of hotels and motels nationwide that pledge to exclude adult offerings from their in-room entertainment service.
... Precise statistics on in-room adult entertainment are difficult to find. By some estimates, adult movies are available in roughly 40 percent of the nation’s hotels, representing more than 1.5 million rooms. Industry analysts suggest that these adult offerings generate 60 percent to 80 percent of total in-room entertainment revenue—several hundred million dollars a year.
Of course, the hotel chains defend their actions by calling their critics prudes and asserting the high-minded ideal of consumers’ freedom of choice. (Meanwhile, I’m thinking of all those icky hotel room beds and whatnot. Blech! CleanHotels.com indeed.)
Morality v. business
I agree, Dom! Pornography is wretched.
And who praytell provides this service to Marriott and other hotel chains?
The same people who bring you fair and balanced news. Fox Network
If your going to be outraged, at least be outraged to all that are culpable
Actually the story says the two biggest providers are LodgeNet, based in South Dakota, and Denver-based OnCommand, a subsidiary of Liberty Media Corp. Do you have some documentation that says that NewsCorp (which is what I assume you mean since I’ve never seen adult movies on either the Fox Network or Fox News) is a provider of adult movies to hotel chains, specifically Marriott?
I guess I made the same point earlier yesterday in my post about state Treasurer Tim Cahill and his daughter. Here I was mainly thinking of it in relation to p0rn0graphy. I doubt it’s as much a problem with girls, although with the way things have been changing lately, maybe it is.
Actually the story says the two biggest providers are LodgeNet, based in South Dakota, and Denver-based OnCommand, a subsidiary of Liberty Media Corp. Do you have some documentation that says that NewsCorp (which is what I assume you mean since I’ve never seen adult movies on either the Fox Network or Fox News) is a provider of adult movies to hotel chains, specifically Marriott?
Just check out liberty media’s list of non public investors Dom. You’ll see that News Corporation is listed as an investor. Both companies have been in business together for many years. Between DirectV and its stake in Liberty, News Corporation makes a huge amount of its money off of porn.
Being an investor and being the supplier are two different things, are they not?
The difference is remote v. immediate material cooperation.
In any case, it’s a good thing Cardinal Mahony wrangled that papal Order of St. George for Rupert Murdoch.
You asked for documentation and you were given it. News Corp owns a significant portion of Liberty Media. They also own DirectV and profit greatly from their distribution of porn.
Yet folks would prefer to turn a blind eye to those who are profiting from porn? Ridiculous
I’m not turning a blind eye, but I wonder if remote v. immediate material cooperation makes a difference.
On the other hand, that the parent company owns porn distributors does not affect the quality of the newsporting at Fox News. Again, I’m not saying it absolves the corporation, but I think it’s a reach to attack the Fox News credibility because of it.
I didn’t challenge the credibility of Fox news. I said porn is brought to you by the same people who bring you Fox News.
(Although on many occasions, I’d be more than happy to challenge their credibility)
I think my response to Jaime was a little too terse. My apologies. What I said about Murdoch and Mahony was meant to be a criticism of both of them. Regardless of the pron connection, Murdoch’s companies have long been purveyors of entertainment to the lowest common denominator (and admittedly some really good entertainment too like 24 or X-Files or Firefly/Serenity.)
Jaime, my comment about Fox News was prompted by an entirely unrelated comment I saw elsewhere taking a swipe at Fox News for its corporate parentage. I admit it was a bit unfair and obscure to include the reference in my comment. My apologies.
Thanks Dom! I really appreciate it! And now explained, I agree with you completely on your criticism of Mahoney and Murdoch.
Dannyboy the link to show Liberty’s non public investors is http://ir.libertymedia.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=61138&p=irol-newsArticle&ID=707493&highlight=news corporation
And thank you Dannyboy for your positive comments!
“It is really important to recognize just how far the tentacles of sin can reach, and just how complicit we all are in indirectly supporting this sinful culture of ours.”
Well said!
Thanks, Dom, for blogging about this. I have a few trips coming up in the near future (one of which will be the March for Life in DC in January), and I will definitely be looking into clean hotels.
No, we haven’t heard all the voices, of course. You’re good to even wonder about this. The women who are still in it of course say it’s wonderful – they’re selling a fantasy in order to make money or fulfill a desperate need for male affirmation.
I’ve gotten to know (at least via their websites and email) many women who have done sex industry work, and just about every one of them has a history of sexual trauma, either being molested as a child or raped as an adolescent. (Sorry, I know this stuff is depressing!) As one former stripper said, molesters “train” girls to give sexual gratification to men who couldn’t care less about their wellbeing. And many of the women have had abortions, and/or are young single mothers, which to me makes it even more important that prolifers don’t support porn in any way.
The good news is that lots of “formers” are now out of the industry and assisting other women to leave too. I think in the future, we will in fact be hearing about how evil the sex industry is – from the very women who’ve been in it.
Thanks again, and hope everyone is well!
I lodged a protest with Embassy Suites after being solicited for this raunch at the National Catholic Singles’ Conference. Tried to start a minor campaign of complaints upon check-out, but I don’t know if anyone else complained to the poor desk-clerk.
This kind of porn is morally, though perhaps not legally, equivalent to prostitution, and the hotel is a pimp.
Did you know Embassy Suites is a Hilton company? Considering how heiress Paris Hilton made her debut, it seems she was doing something of which her father’s company already approved.