Combining Technology and Human Connection to Combat Demand
We’ve all heard it, “AI” is quickly becoming a part of everyday conversation. To some, it’s exciting; to others, it’s a cause for concern. The movement to end exploitation has also taken notice with claims it will revolutionize the fight, help victims, and empower NGOs while others claim it will put victims at risk. Regardless, overestimating the power of technology risks undermining what will end trafficking: the power of human connection.
Technology and human interactions utilized together, rather than separately, have the greatest potential to reduce demand and influence cultural norms as buyers consider future attempts to purchase sex.
When Epik Project first started engaging buyers in 2013, our conversations were powerful and formative and led to incredible stories. However, our impact was limited due to a lack of robust technology. Once we leveraged scalable technology (omnichannel call center software, integrative queryable database, automation, national decoy network, and occasional chatbots) our footprint became larger than our foot. Technology provided scalability while human volunteers provided complex deterrence of both behavior and underlying beliefs as highlighted in this story:
“Technology provided scalability while human volunteers provided complex deterrence of both behavior and underlying beliefs”
When an Epik volunteer disrupted a buyer’s attempt to purchase the buyer became hostile, told us he was a military vet and that we knew nothing about life. He challenged the volunteer to call him and “say it to his face.” The volunteer called and quickly acknowledged the significance of the buyer’s military service. He thanked the buyer for his service and suggested that his efforts to protect the vulnerable were aligned with ours. The buyer made a dramatic change of heart and became receptive to the truth that buying sex victimizes others. After the call, the buyer sent an unsolicited text saying we were honorable in our conversation and thanked us for our time.
This story is one of many.
According to the report Who Buys Sex, 68% of active buyers would like to stop, and the #1 reason that former buyers stopped was because buying sex didn’t align with their moral beliefs. At MIT’s The Human Strategy, they are studying AI to “better understand human ecosystems.” They suggest that: rather than attempting to replace human operators with fully autonomous machines, it has been shown that certain kinds of human-AI combinations will perform better than humans and AI working alone…. Thus, by building AI systems that are compatible with human behavior, and specifically AI systems that leverage how humans use social information, we can build human-AI decision systems that extend human intelligence capabilities.
In other words, we cannot rely on AI to “revolutionize” how we fight sex trafficking. If there is any revolution it’s that we develop our programs and policies from the fundamental human systems at play that drive the demand and create a culture that is hospitable to exploiting the vulnerable.
I believe this posture toward technology is crucial to be successful as a movement for the following reasons:
Norms. Buying sex is a result of cultural norms that reduce women to objects and men to sexual conquerors. Yes, technology can help effectively interrupt that transaction and temporarily modify behavior. Sustained change, however, must address cultural norms. Using technology is a useful way to disrupt the market but cannot by itself address why people purchase sex.
Value. An over-reliance on technology undermines the story we tell victims and survivors; that they are valued. If so, then they are worthy of our time, not just our capacity to create technology.
Objectification. Buyers view victims as objects of transaction. Leaving the work to technology validates that sex buying is purely transactional. Human intervention reminds buyers of both their and the victim’s humanity.
Agency. An overreliance on technology makes it easy for everyday men to abdicate their responsibility to participate in influencing change. Survivors and advocates have asked “Where are the men?”, not “Where is the technology?” At the end of the day, ending demand is a men’s issue.
CONCLUSION
There is no “silver bullet” solution to the complex problem of combating demand. It can’t just be a technology solution because allowing technology to assume a primary role of disruption alleviates the necessary tension needed to engage more humans in addressing the root causes of exploitation. But neither can it simply be a human solution because of the sheer size of the problem; technology and human engagement are most potent and have the greatest power when utilized together.
