‘I Am Jane Doe’ Documentary Exposes How Sites Like 'Backpage' Help Child Sex Traffickers

September 25, 2017

WRITER

Can you imagine seeing your missing daughter in a prostitution ad? Parents shared their real-life nightmares in the new documentary “I Am Jane Doe,” which takes a sobering look at the child sex trafficking industry facilitated by websites like Backpage.com.

“It’s horrifying, and it’s happening, and people are making millions of dollars on it,” Glenn said on radio Monday while introducing director Mary Mazzio.

She talked about her horrifying revelation that children were being enslaved in droves in the U.S. as well as what Backpage does to help sex traffickers find clients who will rape children by the hour. Backpage and other sites have been allowed to host ads selling children, getting away with it by filtering out terms like “Lolita” or “amber alert” before publishing the ads pimping out kids anyway.

“People call this human trafficking … that’s kind of a sanitized term,” Mazzio said. “What we’re talking about is serial child rape. These children are carted from motel room to motel room.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: There's some things that don't matter at all. Some things that matter a lot. But what matters most?

We're being sucked into things that, really, don't matter at all. We're being sucked into arguments about free speech and safe zones that, quite honestly, I'm sorry, if you're on a college campus, get over it. There are going to be some communists that you are talking to you. And there are going to be some Nazis that are talking to you, and they all have a right to say it. There are going to be some pro-global warming people and some anti-global warming people. You're on a college campus. Get over it. That's where you should be challenged on everything that you think. That's why there is tenure, so somebody can ask outrageous questions. We're not a society that was built on timidity. We have to be able to challenge each other.

So Hollywood, college campuses, communists, Nazis, the NFL, one, a right to stand. You have a right to take a knee. Because, quite honestly, that's a sideshow. Anybody else feel like you were in the Roman Colosseum this weekend? Real things are happening, that actually matter. And we're watching -- we're watching lions and Christians. What are we doing?

There is free speech. And there's an argument that -- it is the argument that has to be made that speech must be protected. And the only kind of speech that has to be protected is the speech that the majority doesn't like.

However, there are people that hide behind free speech. And they do real damage. Right now, in Congress, they are talking about the Communications Act and the Communications Decency Act of 1996. And there is -- there is something that came from The Village Voice, it's called the Backpage. And it is the literal auction platform for slavery today.

And people have been trying to shut this down for quite some time, and they have some really good attorneys.

This needs to be heard by you. There is a movie that is out, that just came out. It's on Netflix and i Tunes and Vimeo and Google Play, Amazon DVD. It is called I Am Jane Doe. Parents -- it's hard to watch. It's parents who sent their kids off to school one day, and they didn't come back. Kids that left home and didn't come back, until their parents found them being sold on the Backpage of the Village Voice. It's horrifying, and it's happening. And people are making millions of dollars on it.

A woman who didn't know anything about human trafficking just a few years ago is the producer and director of I Am Jane Doe. And she's with em now. Mary Mazzio. Hi, Mary, how are you?

MARY: Glenn, how are you this morning? Thank you for having me on.

GLENN: You're welcome. So explain to the audience exactly what's happening.

MARY: So this started, Glenn, when I read an article in the Boston Globe about Jane Doe number one, Jane Doe number two, and Jane Doe number three, age 13, 14, and 15 years old, that sued backpage.com and the Village Voice empire for -- for compensation for injuries they sustained by virtue of being bought and sold for commercial sex online. And people call this human trafficking and sex trafficking. And sex trafficking of minors. That's kind of a sanitized term, right?

What we're talking about is serial child rape, right?

These children are carted from motel room to motel room. They are with the admin of technology, right? They're schedule on the hour by the hour.

And I had not a clue that this was happening in numbers that would make your head spin in this country. I think, like most Americans, I assumed this was happening in developing countries, right? Where children are bought and sold for sex.

And when I read this article, I remember thinking, "What the hell?" This is ten minutes from where I live. Jane Doe one, two, and three. And they're represented, by the way, by Ropes & Gray, one of sort of the oldest white-shoe law firms in the country. And, oh, by the way, how did Ropes & Gray get the case? Like, how did they lose their motion, right? How did they lose this lawsuit?

That made no sense to me. And I'm a recovering lawyer, which is like highly irritating to many people, by the way. But I'm really thinking at the time -- I read the decision, and I remember thinking, "How is it legal in this country for websites like Backpage -- and there are many others, by the way, to host ads selling children? How is that legal? And yet, it is.

GLENN: Okay. So now -- so people understand, this is some -- you know, this comes from The Village Voice. And a lot of people on the left were protecting The Village Voice. And they were like, "No. There's no way they understand. There's no way this is happening." Because to a lot of people on the left, The Village Voice is, you know, the voice of a generation, and a hero outlet to many.

MARY: Oh, yeah. Fighting -- fighting truth to power, right? I mean, exposing corruption. Exposing wrongdoing.

And yet -- and listen, I'm a liberal, right? I swing very left. And it pains me, right? That Backpage and the Village Voice -- and we'll talk about Google in a minute. But the dirty little secret to all the alternative weeklies was that their editorial was supported by the sex ad. And, listen, back in the '70s, it was free love, free sex, right? Whatever goes. And I think the term -- the lexicon around human trafficking, nobody really started talking about it until ten years ago, 12 years ago. What is it? And I think that really exposed -- what you said before, this is -- particularly as it relates to children, modern day slavery. And the numbers are escalating with technology online. And what I mean by that is that the problem is getting worse, rather than better. There's an estimate of around 15 percent of all homeless and runaway children, will be victimized. And when you think about the numbers, there's anywhere between 1.6 and 2.5 million children on the street at any one time.

Fifteen percent of those children -- oh, my God, we're not talking about a kid here or there that shows up at the Port Authority. We are talking about conservatively, hundreds of thousands of children. And, by the way, I received this report from the University of Louisville. And they said, "Mary, you know, we understand that 15 percent is sort of the estimate. It's in the shadows. Nobody quite knows. But make no mistake, we -- we did a study of children in Kentucky and Indiana, we have concluded that 40 percent of homeless and runaway children were victimized by child sex trafficking. Forty percent. So this is a problem that is escalating in size and scale. And it sits along the opioid epidemic. And that is something that nobody is talking about. Because those children are the most vulnerable.

GLENN: Okay. Mary, I'm going to run out of time. So I would like to -- because I want to get -- I want to build this in layers because there's a lot of information that people need to absorb.

First, I want you to watch the video. It's free. It's everywhere. It's I Am Jane Doe. It is a really well-produced documentary. And I warn you, when you start talking about freedom of speech, you will -- you will -- if you're a Libertarian, start to say, "Well, wait a minute. Hang on just a second. Do they have a right -- do they have a responsibility to know exactly what's happening on the other side, if somebody is just putting in a classified ad?" But that's not what's happening here. You know, if somebody wants to post something on Facebook -- Facebook isn't responsible for what everybody says online. They can't be. It will put them out of business.

Nobody can do that. But that's not what's happening. Can you quickly, Mary, explain what the Backpage is doing.

MARY: Yeah, and so this is really interesting. Because a Senate investigation sprang up, which provided all kinds of evidence that -- for example, a pimp or a trafficker might post an ad for a child and would use terms that would signal a child: New in town, fresh off the boat, schoolgirl.

These are indicia, of a child, right? And Backpage developed filters, according to the congressional report, that would automatically scrub the term "Lolita" or "schoolgirl," right? Or Amber Alert, and yet the ad would then be posted.

So there was some conscious decision to mask indicia of a child. And I think that is what is so troubling about the Wild West online is that Backpage and those that have supported Backpage -- which, by the way, includes Google and others that are desperate to keep this Wild West culture online have said, even if you're a website that encourages illegality, you still bear no responsibility for the harm that happens, including the sale of children.

STU: Mary, just to clarify, were you saying that they put the term Amber Alert in the ads?

MARY: Some traffickers apparently put the term "Amber Alert," because it was a term that Congress discovered that was filtered out automatically by Backpage.

STU: That is absolutely unbelievable.

MARY: I kid you not. I kid you not. There's a new child to the cause, and there's an effort in Congress right now to really close the loophole, right? If you're a bad actor and you're encouraging this activity, you ought to bear some responsibility. Right? There should be a financial incentive for you to clean up your act.

And one of the mothers, her child, she lost her child at Christmas time to a Backpage buyer. Her daughter was 16 years old. What did the ad say? Fresh. New in town.

GLENN: I learned this from working with Operation Underground Railroad, that there are, you know, low miles. There are terms.

MARY: Precisely.

GLENN: There are terms that people who are buying children clearly understand. And for Backpage to be censoring those and then not turning those people into police is really quite reprehensible and frightening.

I want you to -- here's what I want you to do: Mary, would you be willing to come back later this week? Because I want to talk to you about the Google connection.

MARY: Yes, of course.

GLENN: Because Mary is -- you know, correct me if I'm wrong, Mary, but you and I don't agree on much, I would imagine.

(laughter)

MARY: Exactly. You could probably count it on one hand, Glenn.

GLENN: Yes. So we don't agree on much. However, we do agree on this. And what she's going through now, what Google appears to be doing to her, they are making her look like me. They're making her -- you know, treating her --

STU: This is terrible, Mary. I'm so sorry for you.

GLENN: Yeah, no. They're treating her like they would treat me. So something is really wrong. I get it when they're treating me that way. But when they're treating one of their own, there's something really wrong. And I want her to explain that.

But the first thing I want you to do is, please today watch I Am Jane Doe and bring yourself up to speed on this. Because there's something going through Congress that needs to happen. Later this week, I hope to have Mike Lee on to talk -- have you talked to Mike Lee about this at all, Mary?

MARY: No -- no, I have not.

GLENN: Okay. So I would like to get Mike involved in this. Because I trust Mike as a real strict constitutionalist, but he's also a deeply moral man. And so we'll -- you know, we'll not excuse -- will not excuse the -- the horrors done to people over -- you know, for rights, if you will.

MARY: Right. Exactly. And he's a First Amendment specialist. And I think both he and I fundamentally agree, this is about conduct online. It has nothing to do with speech.

GLENN: Nothing to do with speech. Okay. Mary, thank you so much. I appreciate it.

The name of the movie is I am Jane Doe. We'll talk again, Mary. Thanks.

Silent genocide exposed: Are christians being wiped out in 2025?

Aldara Zarraoa / Contributor | Getty Images

Is a Christian Genocide unfolding overseas?

Recent reports suggest an alarming escalation in violence against Christians, raising questions about whether these acts constitute genocide under international law. Recently, Glenn hosted former U.S. Army Special Forces Sniper Tim Kennedy, who discussed a predictive model that forecasts a surge in global Christian persecution for the summer of 2025.

From Africa to Asia and the Middle East, extreme actions—some described as genocidal—have intensified over the past year. Over 380 million Christians worldwide face high levels of persecution, a number that continues to climb. With rising international concern, the United Nations and human rights groups are urging protective measures by the global community. Is a Christian genocide being waged in the far corners of the globe? Where are they taking place, and what is being done?

India: Hindu Extremist Violence Escalates

Yawar Nazir / Contributor | Getty Images

In India, attacks on Christians have surged as Hindu extremist groups gain influence within the country. In February 2025, Hindu nationalist leader Aadesh Soni organized a 50,000-person rally in Chhattisgarh, where he called for the rape and murder of all Christians in nearby villages and demanded the execution of Christian leaders to erase Christianity. Other incidents include forced conversions, such as a June 2024 attack in Chhattisgarh, where a Hindu mob gave Christian families a 10-day ultimatum to convert to Hinduism. In December 2024, a Christian man in Uttar Pradesh was attacked, forcibly converted, and paraded while the mob chanted "Death to Jesus."

The United States Commission on International Religious Freedom (USCIRF) recommends designating India a "Country of Particular Concern" and imposing targeted sanctions on those perpetrating these attacks. The international community is increasingly alarmed by the rising tide of religious violence in India.

Syria: Sectarian Violence Post-Regime Change

LOUAI BESHARA / Contributor | Getty Images

Following the collapse of the Assad regime in December 2024, Syria has seen a wave of sectarian violence targeting religious minorities, including Christians, with over 1,000 killed in early 2025. It remains unclear whether Christians are deliberately targeted or caught in broader conflicts, but many fear persecution by the new regime or extremist groups. Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), a dominant rebel group and known al-Qaeda splinter group now in power, is known for anti-Christian sentiments, heightening fears of increased persecution.

Christians, especially converts from Islam, face severe risks in the unstable post-regime environment. The international community is calling for humanitarian aid and protection for Syria’s vulnerable minority communities.

Democratic Republic of Congo: A "Silent Genocide"

Hugh Kinsella Cunningham / Stringer | Getty Images

In February 2025, the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), an ISIS-affiliated group, beheaded 70 Christians—men, women, and children—in a Protestant church in North Kivu, Democratic Republic of Congo, after tying their hands. This horrific massacre, described as a "silent genocide" reminiscent of the 1994 Rwandan genocide, has shocked the global community.

Since 1996, the ADF and other militias have killed over six million people, with Christians frequently targeted. A Christmas 2024 attack killed 46, further decimating churches in the region. With violence escalating, humanitarian organizations are urging immediate international intervention to address the crisis.

POLL: Starbase exposed: Musk’s vision or corporate takeover?

MIGUEL J. RODRIGUEZ CARRILLO / Contributor | Getty Images

Is Starbase the future of innovation or a step too far?

Elon Musk’s ambitious Starbase project in South Texas is reshaping Boca Chica into a cutting-edge hub for SpaceX’s Starship program, promising thousands of jobs and a leap toward Mars colonization. Supporters see Musk as a visionary, driving economic growth and innovation in a historically underserved region. However, local critics, including Brownsville residents and activists, argue that SpaceX’s presence raises rents, restricts beach access, and threatens environmental harm, with Starbase’s potential incorporation as a city sparking fears of unchecked corporate control. As pro-Musk advocates clash with anti-Musk skeptics, will Starbase unite the community or deepen the divide?

Let us know what you think in the poll below:

Is Starbase’s development a big win for South Texas?

Should Starbase become its own city?

Is Elon Musk’s vision more of a benefit than a burden for the region?

Shocking truth behind Trump-Zelenskyy mineral deal unveiled

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

President Donald Trump and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy have finalized a landmark agreement that will shape the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations. The agreement focuses on mineral access and war recovery.

After a tense March meeting, Trump and Zelenskyy signed a deal on Wednesday, April 30, 2025, granting the U.S. preferential mineral rights in Ukraine in exchange for continued military support. Glenn analyzed an earlier version of the agreement in March, when Zelenskyy rejected it, highlighting its potential benefits for America, Ukraine, and Europe. Glenn praised the deal’s strategic alignment with U.S. interests, including reducing reliance on China for critical minerals and fostering regional peace.

However, the agreement signed this week differs from the March proposal Glenn praised. Negotiations led to significant revisions, reflecting compromises on both sides. What changes were made? What did each leader seek, and what did they achieve? How will this deal impact the future of U.S.-Ukraine relations and global geopolitics? Below, we break down the key aspects of the agreement.

What did Trump want?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Trump aimed to curb what many perceive as Ukraine’s overreliance on U.S. aid while securing strategic advantages for America. His primary goals included obtaining reimbursement for the billions in military aid provided to Ukraine, gaining exclusive access to Ukraine’s valuable minerals (such as titanium, uranium, and lithium), and reducing Western dependence on China for critical resources. These minerals are essential for aerospace, energy, and technology sectors, and Trump saw their acquisition as a way to bolster U.S. national security and economic competitiveness. Additionally, he sought to advance peace talks to end the Russia-Ukraine war, positioning the U.S. as a key mediator.

Ultimately, Trump secured preferential—but not exclusive—rights to extract Ukraine’s minerals through the United States-Ukraine Reconstruction Investment Fund, as outlined in the agreement. The U.S. will not receive reimbursement for past aid, but future military contributions will count toward the joint fund, designed to support Ukraine’s post-war recovery. Zelenskyy’s commitment to peace negotiations under U.S. leadership aligns with Trump’s goal of resolving the conflict, giving him leverage in discussions with Russia.

These outcomes partially meet Trump’s objectives. The preferential mineral rights strengthen U.S. access to critical resources, but the lack of exclusivity and reimbursement limits the deal’s financial benefits. The peace commitment, however, positions Trump as a central figure in shaping the war’s resolution, potentially enhancing his diplomatic influence.

What did Zelenskyy want?

Global Images Ukraine / Contributor | Getty Images

Zelenskyy sought to sustain U.S. military and economic support without the burden of repaying past aid, which has been critical for Ukraine’s defense against Russia. He also prioritized reconstruction funds to rebuild Ukraine’s war-torn economy and infrastructure. Security guarantees from the U.S. to deter future Russian aggression were a key demand, though controversial, as they risked entangling America in long-term commitments. Additionally, Zelenskyy aimed to retain control over Ukraine’s mineral wealth to safeguard national sovereignty and align with the country’s European Union membership aspirations.

The final deal delivered several of Zelenskyy’s priorities. The reconstruction fund, supported by future U.S. aid, provides a financial lifeline for Ukraine’s recovery without requiring repayment of past assistance. Ukraine retained ownership of its subsoil and decision-making authority over mineral extraction, granting only preferential access to the U.S. However, Zelenskyy conceded on security guarantees, a significant compromise, and agreed to pursue peace talks under Trump’s leadership, which may involve territorial or political concessions to Russia.

Zelenskyy’s outcomes reflect a delicate balance. The reconstruction fund and retained mineral control bolster Ukraine’s economic and sovereign interests, but the absence of security guarantees and pressure to negotiate peace could strain domestic support and challenge Ukraine’s long-term stability.

What does this mean for the future?

Handout / Handout | Getty Images

While Trump didn’t secure all his demands, the deal advances several of his broader strategic goals. By gaining access to Ukraine’s mineral riches, the U.S. undermines China’s dominance over critical elements like lithium and graphite, essential for technology and energy industries. This shift reduces American and European dependence on Chinese supply chains, strengthening Western industrial and tech sectors. Most significantly, the agreement marks a pivotal step toward peace in Europe. Ending the Russia-Ukraine war, which has claimed thousands of lives, is a top priority for Trump, and Zelenskyy’s commitment to U.S.-led peace talks enhances Trump’s leverage in negotiations with Russia. Notably, the deal avoids binding U.S. commitments to Ukraine’s long-term defense, preserving flexibility for future administrations.

The deal’s broader implications align with the vision Glenn outlined in March, when he praised its potential to benefit America, Ukraine, and Europe by securing resources and creating peace. While the final agreement differs from Glenn's hopes, it still achieves key goals he outlined.

Did Trump's '51st state' jab just cost Canada its independence?

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Did Canadians just vote in their doom?

On April 28, 2025, Canada held its federal election, and what began as a promising conservative revival ended in a Liberal Party regroup, fueled by an anti-Trump narrative. This outcome is troubling for Canada, as Glenn revealed when he exposed the globalist tendencies of the new Prime Minister, Mark Carney. On a recent episode of his podcast, Glenn hosted former UK Prime Minister Liz Truss, who provided insight into Carney’s history. She revealed that, as governor of the Bank of England, Carney contributed to the 2022 pension crisis through policies that triggered excessive money printing, leading to rampant inflation.

Carney’s election and the Liberal Party’s fourth consecutive victory spell trouble for a Canada already straining under globalist policies. Many believed Canadians were fed up with the progressive agenda when former Prime Minister Justin Trudeau resigned amid plummeting public approval. Pierre Poilievre, the Conservative Party leader, started 2025 with a 25-point lead over his Liberal rivals, fueling optimism about his inevitable victory.

So, what went wrong? How did Poilievre go from predicted Prime Minister to losing his own parliamentary seat? And what details of this election could cost Canada dearly?

A Costly Election

Mark Carney (left) and Pierre Poilievre (right)

GEOFF ROBINSPETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

The election defied the expectations of many analysts who anticipated a Conservative win earlier this year.

For Americans unfamiliar with parliamentary systems, here’s a brief overview of Canada’s federal election process. Unlike U.S. presidential elections, Canadians do not directly vote for their Prime Minister. Instead, they vote for a political party. Each Canadian resides in a "riding," similar to a U.S. congressional district, and during the election, each riding elects a Member of Parliament (MP). The party that secures the majority of MPs forms the government and appoints its leader as Prime Minister.

At the time of writing, the Liberal Party has secured 169 of the 172 seats needed for a majority, all but ensuring their victory. In contrast, the Conservative Party holds 144 seats, indicating that the Liberal Party will win by a solid margin, which will make passing legislation easier. This outcome is a far cry from the landslide Conservative victory many had anticipated.

Poilievre's Downfall

PETER POWER / Contributor | Getty Images

What caused Poilievre’s dramatic fall from front-runner to losing his parliamentary seat?

Despite his surge in popularity earlier this year, which coincided with enthusiasm surrounding Trump’s inauguration, many attribute the Conservative loss to Trump’s influence. Commentators argue that Trump’s repeated references to Canada as the "51st state" gave Liberals a rallying cry: Canadian sovereignty. The Liberal Party framed a vote for Poilievre as a vote to surrender Canada to U.S. influence, positioning Carney as the defender of national independence.

Others argue that Poilievre’s lackluster campaign was to blame. Critics suggest he should have embraced a Trump-style, Canada-first message, emphasizing a balanced relationship with the U.S. rather than distancing himself from Trump’s annexation remarks. By failing to counter the Liberal narrative effectively, Poilievre lost momentum and voter confidence.

This election marks a pivotal moment for Canada, with far-reaching implications for its sovereignty and economic stability. As Glenn has warned, Carney’s globalist leanings could align Canada more closely with international agendas, potentially at the expense of its national interests. Canadians now face the challenge of navigating this new political landscape under a leader with a controversial track record.

Glenn's Show Prep