Craigslist is expected to boost revenue by a whopping 22 percent this year thanks in large part to fee-based postings in its adult services section, a new report concludes. About one-third of the $122m Craigslist is expected to bring in in 2010 will come from the adult ads, which often promote the services of prostitutes, …
I dunno about you people
but i've browsed the craigslist prostitution ads and i've never found anything interesting. perhaps my area is a weak one.
most of the ads i've seen are people that also follow furry forums and are transexuals.
not my idea of a good time.
as for the credit card thing, I know friends that have loaned other friends their cc's to use, so that doesn't do crap.
200k? Poor bastards...
I don't claim to speak from experience, but if the harlots advertising their jubblies (amongst other things) on Craigslist are anything like the streetwalkers downtown on a weekend night, then I could well imagine it being the first investigation relating to grown women on t'internet where someones said "But can't you IT folks just turn the bloody pictures off?"
Anyway, it's nothing new. Been going on for thousands of years, now it's just in a directory online, like going to a stores website and ordering parts for the car (and nothing against these women but they're the ones who, for whichever reason, choose to offer their 'time' in exchange for fiscal compensation). They're aware of the format, how accessible it is, so Craigslist isn't preying on them. It's a business, and businesses run by making money, which they get from consumers - by providing a good or service the consumers desire. If they did make some donation to groups dedicated to helping women in general, and especially the ones who are coerced or somehow forced into this, then they should be applauded, but they can't give away all their profits from a substantial revenue stream indefinitely.
The DA or whoever is probably simply afraid that his wife has been busy perusing 'w4m'
Living off immoral earnings?
Don't they have a similar law in the good-ol' US of A?
If they did
All politicians and lawyers would be broke.
Not just adult services, but also personals have solictation ads
Note that it's actually the Cook County Sheriff (Tom Dart) who is pursuing the Chicago CL issue.
Authorities are completely ignoring (and apparently ignorant about) solicitations for paid sex permeating the regular (i.e., not adult services) personals section (often using language such as "generous," "generou$," "french lessons," "tuition assistance" or "a$$i$tance," etc.). CL makes no effort to prohibit such ads, and seldom block ads flagged as "prohibited" content.
Story alleges some adverts are placed by pimps.
That's not "pimp" in the odd apparent modern sense of "not oppressed by any of my current girlfriends", but "controller of prostitutes". It's on HIS credit card. (Or one of his friends'. Or in the lady's name.)
I assume that's illegal, but then that's a lot of why we're discussing it. (We could also be criticising people doing things that are legal but sinful. And/or collectively harmful.)
Craig's List needs to charge money for their Red Light District to hire lawyers to defend against the lawsuits over operating their Red Light District.
Blame the holier-than-thou DAs like Blumenthal
CL NEVER CHARGED for those ads UNTIL loudmouth DAs like Blumenthal and that other yokel Henry McMaster from South Carolina (who was trying to get re-elected) got their pious PR machines going making a big stink about it. Which forced CL to A) waste tons of time/money fighting frivolous lawsuits that were ultimately thrown out of court, B) hire extra staff solely for the purpose of vetting the adult ads, and C) started requiring a credit-card as a way of verifying identity.
I'm sure that far more criminal acts in this country get committed with the assistance of the telephone, yet I haven't heard calls to shut down all the telephone companies for that "sin".
Plain and simple, these are political hacks trying to make a name for themselves, they are either right-wingers like McMaster that see little to like about progressive businesses like CL, or publicity hounds like Blumenthal trying to create false controversies. Blumental went after MySpace before CL. According to wikipedia:
"In 2007, Hans Bader, Counsel for Special Projects of the Competitive Enterprise Institute (a Libertarian think-tank) ranked Blumenthal as "the nation's worst state attorney general", based on "a set of explicit criteria — such as encroachment on the powers of other branches of government, meddling in the affairs of other states or federal agencies, encouragement of judicial activism and frivolous lawsuits, favoritism towards campaign contributors, ethical breaches, and failure to provide representation to state agencies or to provide legal advice." Bader singled out Blumenthal for his role in the 1998 tobacco settlement and state efforts to regulate carbon dioxide in other states through lawsuits against out-of-state companies.
Rob Simmons, one of Blumenthal's Republican contenders for Senator of Connecticut, has circulated this document on the Internet, charging Blumenthal with "supporting meritless, politically-driven lawsuits.""
and the other third of the profits
come from the folks in "legal" weed counties selling dope to those who don't. But government won't go after that, they *need* more mentally addled chronic users who can't remember what lies they were told last week and can't be upset enough to do anything about it.
legalize everything! Sit in front of the government-funded tube, with your government funded dope, mellow taxpayer. Cuz that cliche of chronically unemployed unambitious losers who care more about their next score and satisfying the munchies can't possibly be based on truth. Here come a thousand weed evangelists now to claim otherwise!
There are already separate laws dealing with trafficking and the other crime related reasons that people drag up when defending the prohibition on prostitutes. Most of the "crime" that people bring up when defending the anti-prostitution laws, the physical abuse, the trafficking, drugs, etc., are in fact PROTECTED by the laws against prostitution.
Think about it, why doesn't a woman who has just been beaten by her pimp go to the police? Because she will get arrested for being a prostitute and the pimp will probably get a lighter sentence than she will.
If prostitution was legal these "Victims", that everyone seems so concerned with protecting that we put them in jail, would be able to go to the police and press charges, or get restraining orders, or even just try to get help without fear of being arrested for trying to take care of herself and her family.
How is renting your body for sex any different from renting your skills as an accountant, programmer or ditch digger to a company/individual in exchange for money?
And before you bring up STIs and "street walkers", consider these ideas;
Require a permit, renewed monthly, that requires a clear STI screening result from a clinic. (funny that one of the complaints I hear about hookers is that they leave used condoms laying all over the place, sounds like they are better at practicing safe sex than most people.)
Most of the hookers you see on the street would move inside where it is safer, if they could just advertise in the paper or on sites like craigslist.
putting this in front of the one clown
Makes them McMaster baiters.
follow the links, not just the money
This whole thing comes from the advertising for one "report" -- which sells for <a href="http://www.aimgroup.com/index.php/article/craigslist-revenue-profits-soar">$400</a>.
craigslist has been fighting bull like this for years, but it's peaking right now. <a href="http://blog.craigslist.org/2010/04/true-colors-are-showing/"></a> <a href="http://blog.craigslist.org/2010/04/sad-state-of-affairs-at-the-new-york-times/"></a> <a href="http://blog.craigslist.org/2010/04/coverage-of-ct-ag-grandstanding/"></a> <a href="http://blog.craigslist.org/2010/04/misdirected-outrage/"></a>