Here is the original article. The ad comes straight from Uber's offices. Ordering "hot chicks" to drive you around? Yeah, I'd definitely say that counts as an escort service.
I saw no journalism demonstrating that Uber was violating any laws. I saw no journalism to demonstrate that Uber agreed to ferry little girls smuggled into France to the various sex dens for abuse.
Where did anyone say any of that? The original claim was that Uber was partnering with an escort service. That fact is not in dispute, and was in fact advertised by Uber as you can see right there in the fine article. The opinion I'm referring to here is the claim that that behavior is sexist, one which I've said before I do not 100% agree with, but its certainly not exactly a "public accusation" that anyone should have to "back up" in order to be considered legitimate.
I say "You know, this one guy posted pictures of his ex to show people what a nasty person she was" and you reply "sometimes I wonder if I should do that."
Here's a quote from the Buzzfeed article on the current controversy:
Over dinner, he outlined the notion of spending “a million dollars” to hire four top opposition researchers and four journalists. That team could, he said, help Uber fight back against the press — they’d look into “your personal lives, your families,” and give the media a taste of its own medicine.
Those are a lot of specifics for someone who was simply egged on, and there's much more outlined in the article. But even without that evidence, you're making an enormous stretch trying to imply that somehow this journalist fed the guy those lines. I wonder where else you make huge leaps of logic in order to imply that a female victim brought something upon herself.
this is NOT journalism and Buzzfeed failed.
The only failure here lies with your reading comprehension, oh mighty arbiter of what is and isn't 'real' journalism. Maybe you should stick to Senior Systems Engineering.