After facing lawsuits and major scandals, (a Boston woman was killed when she responded to an ad on Craigslist), the company announced it would shut down its exotic services section in the U.S., and replace it with a new monitored adult-services category. Now, according to the Globe and Mail, a spokesperson for the company in San Francisco says they are looking at avenues the Canadian Craigslist can take to do the same. In particular,
Ben Perrin, a law professor at the University of British Columbia, along with the RCMP and the Peel Regional Police force in Ontario have discussed the issue with the online classified ad company in an effort to prevent sexual exploitation of minors.
Perrin says Craigslist has been used a portal for these purposes.
The number of postings in Toronto and Vancouver in particular have increased according to Craigslist, in recent months, so there's a real need to tackle this issue in Canada.
Although there are certain meaures in place to help filter certain words prevalent in the sex industry from being used in ads, Perrin says,
What's critically missing from the Canadian Craigslist websites, of which there are over 50, is phone number and credit-card verification for someone who wants to post in the erotic services section.
Ontario police say Craigslist has been very open to discussion to working together.
Actually, minor correction: The Boston woman was killed after POSTING, not responding to, an ad on Craigslist. She was a prostitute. This makes her murder no less horrific, but it does imply the compromise in safety one assumes when they invite people anonymously to hotel rooms in the middle of the night for a "massage".
These District Attorney / Law Enforcement knee-jerks are allegorical to closing a city block because there happen to be hookers and ne'er-do-wells hanging around on it. We have dealt with this ignorance-based issue with politicians on the internet before and will again. It's a series of tubes.
Globe and Mail says responding to....
... I guess I'm just lucky that the Globe & Mail isn't the only newspaper I read then!
Andrew,
You're missing the point. You corrected me, and I was in fact, correct. I quoted the Globe and Mail article, not the NY Times, which read "responding to," however I digress. That is NOT the issue..the post is not about that nor does that fact lend any merit to your point about Craigslist regulating the site in Canada. I'm sure you realize that. And you are lucky that the Globe and Mail isn't the only newspaper you read. Imagine that?!
Actually it's quite a critical point. When you incorrectly state that the murder victim "responded to" ads on Craigslist the implication is that Craigslist were somehow complicit in allowing the accused killer to post ads which lured his victims. While there's some evidence he tried, there's greater evidence that he simply responded to ads posted by those offering professional services to get to his victims.
I am pretty sure Jim & Craig would take issue with your assertion that the difference here is not germane. The gap is critical both from a public safety perspective and in terms of the steps that CL could take to mitigate the risk for others in the future.
BTW. Here's the NY Times saying that she posted an ad to get customers: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/25/us/25boston.html
I surveyed Associated Press, UPI, CNN, ABC News, and the Boston Herald and all of these confirmed that the assailant responded to an ad posted by the victim. But by all means let's rely on the Globe & Mail, which is in Toronto and likely doesn't have a reporter assigned to the story.
The second point you're missing (and I was too polite to point out until you posted a snarky reply) is that if all you're doing is summarizing a post from the Globe & Mail web site, why are you wasting your time writing an article? Just retweet it and move on.
If you can't demean yourself to research the story (which you evidently know nothing about) and/or add some value then you're not really doing any of us much good. You were tripped up by a factual error that made its way into the G&M piece precisely because you failed to consider a second source, compounding their lazy journalism with your own.
So no... repeating someone else's error does NOT make you "correct".
Have you emailed the Globe and Mail about this? I really feel like you have some definite aggression issues with them and I'm getting the brunt of it. Let's move on, shall we? You didn't like my summary? Fine. Calling me a lazy journalist, because I didn't survey the AP, UPI, CNN, ABC News and the Boston Herald? I'll take that. Anything else you'd like to be not too polite to point out? I'll listen.
The personal section featuring Erotic ads on Calgary’s Craigslist and probably all in Canada are not closely monitored by CL staff there is a lot of postings that don’t meet the policy and terms agreement. Quite frankly why are unlicensed providers allowed to advertise dating services when its against a city bylaw to be unlicensed ? Why are provides allowed to advertise in call dating when its not allowed if you hold a licence in Calgary. Life is not always fair but the advertisers on CL in Calgary that use the erotic services section has doubled. This is probably because the police have accomplished cleaning up the street seen in Calgary. Now they need to start on CL and similar sites. I personally am more concerned about the substance addicted providers who are supporting the drug trade. Of course the money comes from their clients and ends in the underground economy.
