It's ugly. It's not proactive. It turns a deaf ear, a blind eye, and a snubby nose to investors. And it looks upon advertising as if it were as appropriate as an anchor tattoo on the Pope's forehead.
In sum, suggests Gary Wolf in the latest issue of Wired, Craigslist is a mess. A horrible mess. An embarrassing mess. A willful mess in which its principals rake in money while its principles seem to revolve around some weirdly benign view of human goodness.
Of course, you can see what he means.
We live in the forging, gorging West. We need things to be large and shiny. We need the surface of everything to be attractive, clean and bright, so that the mirage can somehow compensate for a reality that might not be quite so perfect.
At least, that's what so many of those who manage brands seem to believe.
And yet there's Google, whose sense of design might most politely be described as workmanlike. Although I have heard phrases such as "naive" or even "dull."
Somehow, Google has never really made too much of an effort to sex up the look of its search and it has done really quite well. Microsoft's Bing sees this as one of Google's potential weaknesses and has made at least some attempts to look just a little cooler than its monolithic competitor.
So Craigslist is surely not alone in cradling its utilitarianism, while steering clear of glamour. Wolf makes much of Craig Newmark and CEO Jim Buckmaster being slightly odd types who fancy themselves as libertarian, but rather wealthy, Robin Hoods.
However, shouldn't we really be thinking about ourselves as the odd types?
The fact that Craigslist gets more traffic than either eBay or Amazon suggests that the site's mess is one we humans not only recognize, but even appreciate.
Its utter lack of pretension, its acknowledgment of life as difficult, wayward, and, yes, messy, somehow serves to help people accept it as the place to go for real, everyday, sometimes very cumbersome needs.
Stripped of the glitter associated with conventional advertising and conventional business, Craigslist looks at you openly and benignly and says: "What annoying little burden can we take away for you, today?"
It's commercial psychotherapy of a very different sort than, say, Gucci.com.
The fact that the site and its way of doing business also happen to rhyme rather well with Newmark's and Buckmaster's view of the world might not be cause for criticism, but rather envy.
How many people are fortunate to live and work without having to compromise their principles, even their very personalities?
If Craigslist is such an embarrassing mess, why has no handsome eligible competitor come along and swiped it from the Web, like a nerdy, pimpled boy being removed from the pretty people's party?
Could it be that for all the ugliness, for all the bizarre bazaar-like quality of the site, people feel a certain recognition within its pages? Even a certain trust?
Yes, Craigslist is messy, annoying, contrarian, contradictory, arbitrary and just occasionally totally maddening. Somehow, people like that. Could it be because Craigslist is a little like us?
I am indebted to Wired for raising something very painful.
The hauteurs and auteurs of pornography are feeling the pinch.
And the pillars of the pornographic community (I am not sure if they have a Facebook group) are beginning to admit that it isn't just the economy that is squeezing their bottom lines.
Paul Fishbein, founder of Adult Video News (a group thing that protects, so to speak, trade interests) identifies the web as a source of commercial agony.
"There's a battle with pirated or free material on the internet," he told Wired. "Much like the music industry, adult [movie] producers are trying to figure out how to stem free or pirated content."
(I am as grateful as you that Wired added the word 'movie' in there.)
Henry David Thoreau explains things so well.
(Credit: ktylerconk)Not for a moment would I expect Steve Jobs to suddenly leap into this market and alter the meaning of downloading for ever.
But I know many would see this as one of the web's great moral victories.
In part because of Mr. Fishbein's hideously unAmerican belief that he and his members should be able to stem something that is free.
For years, critics might say, adult (movie) producers preyed upon the strengths of some and the weaknesses of many.
They sought to do it as cheaply as possible and to produce too many adult (movies) that debased rather than uplifted.
And now, in a business sense, they are beginning to experience the pain associated with being a bottom feeder.
Technology has pushed the world in many new directions and suddenly people not only can just do it for themselves, but distribute it themselves too.
Despite Mr. Fishbein's plaintive cries, this is not such a parallel with the music industry.
It is not as if people are choosing to download and share the harpsichord sonatas of Owen Thomas rather than the latest rumbling ruminations of Radiohead because they believe Mr. Thomas's music to be equally joyous.
They are simply saying to the adult (movie) producers: "We're just as good as you." Or as bad, depending on your artistic and moral perspectives.
I am told by those who frequent free online adult (movie) entertainment that the quality is constantly improving. From a very base low. Um, I mean, low base. I think I mean both.
It's funny, in writing about this stuff I'm wondering whether to offer any links. Ach, no. I am told by my handlers that readers here are far ahead of me, technologically speaking.
Aren't you?
- prev
- 1
- next
