In september 2021, an unknown user claiming to be a journalist, popped up on the forum to pornbox and tried to interview XXX. This is what was published:
EN What do you think of the claim that "tube sites killed porn" and What future do you see for online porn?
Our understanding is that porn production is bigger and more diverse than it ever was. It is also our understanding that the porn business is bigger than it ever was. Of course internet and smart phones are probably responsible for this growth. Would the business be better if "tubes" didn't exist? Most certainly. But we didn't invent them (nor did "Youporn"). When tube sites appeared (following Youtube, and in the porn industry, Pornotube), we had sites with 0% UGC and piracy. It was "adapt or die" for everyone in the industry. Journalists love to point fingers at certain sites while using Twitter on a daily basis but your beloved Twitter, just like us, as well as the entire modern internet rely on allowing a certain degree of trust and good will to function.
Porn has a bright future because there is clearly a huge demand for it, that is never acknowledged in the press, by the way. I would say that a solid 75% of the population wants porn. Western societies have failed to properly integrate the sexuality of their people - instead they made sex a dirty thing - creating a gaping hole and generating a lot of suffering.
But it (especially on internet) is also a dream job for many millions of people (and expect this to grow). It is absolutely idiotic for country leaders to want to ban it because it is an activity that is always tied to the people from that country. For example : french people much prefer to see french girls/boys. So this industry cannot be fully exported.
EN Denik N reported testimonies of actresses who were victims of mistreatment during filming under the Legal Porno banner. I saw your clarification, that it is not your own production. However, these shootings were made in your building in Prague, "under your roof". Are the practices described real? Have they changed?
It is clear that you have not read what I wrote on this topic as I have said much more than this. You are asking if the practices are real. What about asking if the alleged events are real to begin with? You even claim that some things occurred under our roof but no such claim was even made. Instead the allegations are a bunch of vague attacks that could have happened at any place, including the many that are not ours.
If you had read our forum then you would also know that Denikn was fed "information" by Pierre Woodman, who is demonstrably a huge liar, extremely manipulative and has been attacking us for many years. You also know that the same Pierre Woodman was in court not so long ago for the very same claims and had a wonderful opportunity to have his voice heard in a very relevant place. Instead the judge told him to stop telling lies and threatened him. You could have read all this right here in our forum.
Understand that Denikn was desperate to damage the xvideos brand. They were hungry to gain popularity by reproducing the Pornhub scenario (it is a very small paper). Unfortunately it wasn't working as they couldn't find anything (they attacked us saying they were able to upload an episode of the Simpsons...). You also know very well why Denikn published garbage-tier "information" from extremely and obviously unreliable sources : the press wants scandals, drama, and it is not going to let the truth get in the way.
For our readers who probably don't know I'll tell you how bad press works : you have a person who decided even before any proper investigation that you are guilty of something and it will make for great drama and will enjoy very much dragging you into the mud while posing as a white knight. They then proceed to look for every person you have ever interacted with, and send them messages asking for dirt while reassuring them than they can remain perfectly anonymous and trash us as much as they want. They gather this crap for a while and dismiss everything that doesn't fit the narrative, then pack it into a trash article with a catchy offensive title and call that "work".
It always does a lot of damage because 1/ most people just read titles or headers, 2/ anything is spread far and wide with Google news + other journalists copying or citing the "work" (they really don't care to verify anything when all they have to do is just write "this paper found this and that"), 3/ a good portion of the others who will read will believe anything anyway, and 4/ the press is very protected (which would be a good thing, if they didn't abuse their powers so much).
Source: https://forum.pornbox.com/viewtopic.php?f=96&t=35029&p=527335#p527335