journalists digging for answers...

ENEN MORE: ok... looks like it's posted now (Nov 6th) ... and... surprise, surprise...(or not) a comment from Craig asking her to call/email? (looks like damage control, again, since the article is somewhat critical of Craig -- looks like she's cought on what looks to me like Craig's evasiveness: "the way to overcome that is to keep asking for examples and dig deeper into what he is saying, but that didn't seem to be working as well for me as it sometimes does"; end of 9th paragraph --> sould have given Heather credit for noticind this and saying it...) D.

I hope she doesn't fall in his trap like so many others have done before: sure she needs to talk to him but she also needs to try to be objective about what she's writing... so setting things aside and doing some independent research is absolutely necesary -- I hope she does it! D.

MORE: well, I don't know what's up with Heather... she either has no comments or she has one! here's what I see when I click on that link (I'm not sure if it's the same if others do it, if you just go to that entry it says no comment but my comment, number 57, must be there somewhere since it posts when I click on the link)

http://heathervale.com/blog/2007/10/30/digging-for-answers-without-a-shovel/#comment-57)...

fine with me if she's got it hidden or something... hopefully she's got the message...

re:
No Comments on Digging For Answers Without A Shovel »

October 31, 2007
Delia @ 8:53 am:

Hi, Heather!

I think it’s great that you are out digging for answers! — that’s what journalists are *supposed* to do…(and you certainly appear to have the credentials)

I would just suggest that you set aside what Craig (or any other interviewee) says and really look into those things…

e.g. “According to Craig in the interview, the community doesn’t care about fancy graphics or features, they just want it to do what it does” –> I’d look into this… feedback forum — it has a search function –is a good place to start: what has the community asked for and for how long? (more than a rudimentary search function is one of the obvious candidates)

Delia

P.S. good luck with everything and take care! D.

.....
Hi, Heather!

I think it's great that you are out digging for answers! -- that’s what journalists are *supposed* to do...(and you certainly appear to have the credentials)

I would just suggest that you set aside what Craig (or any other interviewee) says and really look into those things...

e.g. "According to Craig in the interview, the community doesn’t care about fancy graphics or features, they just want it to do what it does" --> I'd look into this... feedback forum -- it has a search function --is a good place to start: what has the community asked for and for how long? (more than a rudimentary search function is one of the obvious candidates)

Delia

P.S. good luck with everything and take care! D.

Katherine Ann Olson: 1st craigsist murder... or *was* it?

MORE: CNN eat it up also... (just took it from KARE and associated their name with it): "The Craigslist founder says this has *never* happened before."(1:58) ... really? he says so? well, that's ALL we need to know! -- he is reporting this story, isn't he...? D.
.....
Craig, via KARE 11 News:"I can't recall a single case like it" (...) "This is the worst that I can recall" (5th paragraph, The Register, Woman murdered after answering craigslist ad -- flaky link)

Delia

P.S. and the reporters fell for it again... (just took Craig's word for it and failed to check -- Craig's own press... isn't it journalistic malpractice not to at least mention the case of the still missing Donna Jou?)

P.P.S. notice the effectiveness of his vagueness and ambiguity, again... (it seems to lead even seasoned professionals -- hordes of them -- to believe what he appears to want them to believe, when that is not at all the case...) D.

Jimmy puts Craig to shame...

Jimmy, via Valleywag: "I am 100 percent fully supportive of Wikipedia remaining just as it is: a charitable project. Period."

Delia

P.S. good to hear that, Jimmy:) ... D.

comic relief: craigslist search mentioned next to Google search...

that *is* funny!

Delia

P.S. craigslist search has been kept at rudimentary level apparently to "save" money (people have been begging for an upgrade forever...) -- I suppose it all adds up if your goal is to end up with huge net profits and craigslist appears to have done a spectacular job at that since switching to for profit in 1999...

P.P.S. the hefty cash cow must be obese by now... D.

the appearent oddities of search engine hit rankings...

Technorati is not the only one that baffles me... I love Google! (web search) and they appear to love me back... (with some lapses, they have been giving my blog as the top hit for "craigslist criticism" for a long long time...; they even used it to promote Blogger) but that doesn't mean I understand it! for instance, I would have never guessed that a comment re: "craigslist criticism" on Craig's blog would only make the bottom of the first page of hits...

Delia

P.S. about the same for yahoo... D.

Thanks again, Eileen!

Thanks again, Eileen! thanks for helping out, again...(you were the one who got a link to my blog on the New York Times site way back when I had barely started the blog -- it seems to have helped a lot!)

Delia

P.S. I'm pleasantly surprised that you appear to have kept up with my blog. I hope you enjoy it:). BTW, there is nothing *personal* about the jokes on that blog, I just need some comic relief once in a while... (unpleasant topic most of the time)

P.P..S. Best of luck with everything! D.

just as relevant to this blog...

does craigslist target?

not a biggie ... but could use some help...

I'm still baffled by this: if anybody knows how that could happen... (a Technorati insider maybe?:), please let me know!

Delia

P.S. thanks to Seth for some good hints! D.

(Net Neutrality) Craig keeps misrepresenting...

... the issue and Seth's got it right!

Delia

P.S. left a comment for Seth, to that blog entry:

Seth,

I'm with you on this one... actually, it reminds me of one of my comments on Jeff Jarvis' blog (the seeking compensation as a PR person part)

Delia

P.S. BTW, I sent you an email yesterday with a little request... (don't worry if you just didn't have the time for it -- just wanted to make sure you got it) D.

the BS spreads to New Zealand... and sticks!

not a shred of doubt, no questions asked, no actual research... (is this a 3rd grader's paper?)

Delia

Hmmm... looks like Craig's liveblogging got dumped...

EVEN MORE: well, *as of Halloween*...they got it back -- I don't know if they did it on purpose... it is sort of scary... kidding, kidding:) ... D.

MORE: well... it just got dumped from the main Colb-blog... (it's still there if you search for it... not that you'd have good reason to do that... and how many people would think of searching for it anyways... they should have had a plain entry for that instalment of the show so people could post pertinent comments -- Craig's liveblogging was peripheral to the show at best... good thinking to take it off the main blog, at least...) D.

from the Colbert Nation site -- which is UNofficially related to the Colbert Report show -- (there were a couple of his entries there, starting on October 18th -- looks like they didn't keep any of it... :) interesting -- I for one would have posted a comment to that show instalment on the Colb-Blog but NOT to Craig's entry -- after asking disingenuous questions and then claiming *I* was the one "stalking" he deserves nothing of the kind...)

Delia

P.S. does that mean you got my message, Stephen? ;)...

Stephen Colbert is entirely forgiven...

Stephen,

You can do MUCH better than that... (but you are entirely forgiven on account of your performance at the White House Correspondents' Dinner :) -- there just isn't much you can do "wrong" after that...) Best of luck with everything!

Delia

P.S. just a little hint: (re: "why haven't you sold for a billion dollars?") at the current rate of revenue increases (it reportedly went up again by 75mill while expenses continue to be kept ridiculously low), how long will it take for that money to end up in Craig&Co's pockets *without* selling? D.

so... how about it Stephen?

Stephen Dubner:

So... how about it, Stephen? Are you going to write that no-nonsense-article about craigslist? pretty please?:) I’m tired of thinking journalists are a bunch of clueless guys and gals that can be taken for a ride... forever! (it's only been about a decade...)

I'll give you three major hints:

#1. re: why don't they "sell out"? --> at the current rate of revenue increases (it reportedly went up again by another 75mill while expenses continue to be kept ridiculously low), how long will it take for that money to end up in Craig&Co's pockets *without* selling? (the highest valuation for craigslist was around 2 billion...)

#2 "great customer service!" --> 25 employees for how MANY users? (the emperor has no clothes...)

#3 WHY did Craig switch from non-profit to for profit in 1999? (keep in mind that staying non-profit would have provided Craig and everyone else employed a decent living -- the non-profit set up allows for normal salaries, benefits etc.--; it would have also meant that net profits would have been spent on things like customer service and improvements instead of ending up in Craig's, Jim's and the other shareholders' pockets)

Delia

anyways, I was looking for a picture...

update

MORE: if anybody knows where it is or can find it, please let me know! or even better, send it over to Stephen Colbert (a comment to that particular show online or on his blog may be the best way to do it); thanks! D.
.....
that contradicts what Craig said on the Stephen Colbert show (that he *never* takes his shoes off for the camera: 1:41 time mark) : I think it was an older article, something like "A guy named Craig," -- may actually be one of the pictures that originally went with that article -- a shoeless Craig on a couch...)

Delia

Jim is vague and ambiguous again...

Mathew,

that's vague and ambiguous: what's "generally" doing in that statement? re: "we *generally* don’t view information submitted by our users as data to be used for other purposes" (my emphasis); as usual, I think you are taken for a ride...

Delia

P.S. take care, anyways! D.

a breath of fresh air...

Joe DiStefano,

you made my day! what a breath of fresh air...: the vast majority of journalists that write about craigslist sound like embarrassing lap dogs

Delia

P.S. keep it up... on this forum and/or elsewhere D.

let them eat cake!

at this rate, the profits will be in the billions in no time, while expenses are kept ridiculously low: who says the community that built craigslist should have basic things like customer service and improvements... -- "let them eat cake!"

Delia

P.S. low billions (which is the highest valuation for craigslist) is nothing... Craig&Co can milk much more without selling (it's just that you'd think it would blow up at some point -- the number of users left to talk to themselves will be just too high for the scheme to still work... so, yeah, Craig is gambling) D.

the false impression given by "craigslist.org"

Jason,

I don't know if you are doing this knowingly or not but "dot-org" is a misleading characterization of craigslist. Just it case you need some clarification, I think Ryan Blitstein gave the best one around in his article Craig$list.com in the SFWeekly:

"...gives the false impression that the site is a nonprofit, by using ".org," an extension almost exclusively used by nonprofit companies and foundations. Craigslist's marketing materials call this "a symbol of our service mission and non-corporate culture." (Craigslist.com, which the company also owns, draws far less traffic.) It permits Newmark to use the word "non-commercial" twice on Craigslist's "Mission and History" page, and to bury the phrase "No charges, except for job postings" in the third line from the bottom. It means establishing a separate nonprofit, the Craigslist Foundation, which trains other nonprofits in marketing, technology, and fundraising skills, but makes no grants, has no endowment, and charges for many of its training events. This year, Craigslist will provide less than half of the foundation's $240,000 budget."

Delia

P.S. take care! D.

I hope Stephen writes an article on this

Stephen,

This is not bad for gathering info but I hope you use it to write an article that raises the real questions about craigslist (whether or not you succeed in getting Craig/Jim to answer them -- I doubt it...).

Delia

P.S. look at it as a great opportunity (this is one topic that MSM has done a terrible job at covering and the blogosphere hasn't done much better, either...) Good luck! D.

new fees = progress... for the shareholders?

re: "As is usually the case when fees are introduced or raised, Craigslist is presenting this change as progress."

Hi, Michael!

I would have looked into that claim: what happens with that money? -- it appears to go straight into Craig&Co's pockets instead of being used to provide customer service and inprovements...

Delia