As always, start with the Yelp:
“There is a certain je-ne-sais-quoi, a special sort of class, that imbues a neighborhood when it is sporting its very own windowless massage parlor with neon lights and a locked gate even during business hours (ring bell for admittance–I guess they don’t take walk-ins). The “carvings” on the wall seem to be intended to be reminiscent of something Roman.”
Here’s this place today in 2015:
And now let’s learn about how things were back in aught-six, via the San Francisco Chronicle:
DIARY OF A SEX SLAVE PT. 1
DIARY OF A SEX SLAVE PT. 2
DIARY OF A SEX SLAVE PT. 3
DIARY OF A SEX SLAVE PT. 4
IIRC, this series was the talk of the town. Even back then, it was unusual for a newspaper to devote so many resources on one basic story.
And the story itself was single-sourced for the most part – it seemed as if the Chron simply assumed that everything the subject said about the journey from There to Here was true. Oh well.
Anyway, right from the get-go, the Chron started pulling back a bit, getting rid of photos what were “too sexy,” or something, IIRC.
And then came the blowback, hoo boy. This forgotten webpage has the deets:
“Instead of educating Chronicle readers about the cultural background of South Korea, the world’s 10th largest economy, the “Diary” series dwells at length, and with questionable purpose, on the titillating details of one individual’s forced sex acts and non-typical family history. The Chronicle series includes many cultural inaccuracies and paints a distorted picture of Busan, South Korea’s second-largest city. Busan is an international coastal resort known for its open-air seafood — not sex — markets, and as host of the annual International Film Festival, the largest such event in Asia.”
Oh, here it is, the full Monty, blow-backwise. (And the non-SFGate version is here.)
Oh, scratch that, oh here it is, the Great Concessions:
Among the promises won, the San Francisco Chronicle (owned by the New York-based Hearst Corporation) pledged “in principle” not to syndicate the series, to provide the community more “constructive coverage” and access to the paper, and to continue a dialogue with the community to improve development of stories and their sources. Kim herself remained cautious, however: “We need to maintain a vigilant posture to ensure that there is, in fact, meaningful follow-through based on our initial meeting.” “[The syndication] was of utmost concern to our community members, as we feel the culturally damaging impact would be magnified,” emphasized Kim. ”We had also pointed out to the Chronicle’s management that based on the underlying facts of this case, there is a clear legal case to be made for racial bias,” said Kim.
Now, I may be just a simple hyperchicken, but I don’t think you can sue the Chron in a “legal case” for “racial bias” just because you don’t like one of its stories. Or if you do, you’ll get hit with an anti-SLAPP motion what will suspend your discovery process cold, and then make you wish you never ever sued the Chronicle, like the hardest work for the Chron’s attorneys would be proving up the $50,000 in attorney’s fees that you’ll end up paying to the Chron for bringing your nonsensical suit, for “racial bias.”
Or something like that.
Anyway, that’s what I think about whenever I pass by the Twitterloin’s Villa “Aroma,” where something smells, even today…