Wednesday, June 17, 2009

The Scapegoating of Craigslist

Where's Mainstream Media's Perspective Gone?


SAN FRANCISCO, CA.

(Originally posted on CBSNews.com)  This commentary was written by Christopher Lochhead, a former technology executive who now works as a strategy advisor.


Fueled by inflammatory media coverage of a man branded the “Craigslist Killer,” the government has decided to single out Craigslist ever since a woman who offered massages on the site was murdered. 


The irony here is that the unfair treatment of Craigslist by many in the press could harm Internet freedoms at the very time when many old media companies are turning to the Internet for salvation. More about that in a moment. 


Complaints by state and local law enforcement agencies about Craigslist's erotic services section escalated after the tragic murder of Julissa Brisman in April. Police believed she was lured to a Boston hotel by a man suspected of using Craigslist to rob masseuses and escorts. South Carolina Attorney General Henry McMaster even threatened Craigslist CEO Jim Buckmaster with the possibility of criminal prosecution if he didn't remove the erotic services area from the web site within 10 days. 


Last November Craigslist was forced to change its approach to ads for erotic services by 40 states attorneys general. And now the three state attorneys general are pushing for anan out-right ban on the ads. 


It's perhaps coincidence but all this occurs at a time when Craigslist has become the poster child for all that ails the newspaper business model. While old media companies have been threatened by online upstarts for the last decade, the emergence of Craigslist, in particular, hit newspapers hard as it garnered an increasing share of the classified ad market, traditionally a big source of income for newspapers. Nowadays, Craigslist, which claims over 50 million users, posts more than 40 million classifieds each month. 


The dramatic damage to newspapers has forced the shutdown of longtime metro dailies like the Rocky Mountain News in Denver and the 146-year-old Seattle Post-Intelligencer. The rest of the industry isn't faring much better. (RealClearPolitics.com has published a list called “Top Ten Newspapers In Trouble.") Just this month, Senator John Kerry declared newspapers to be an "an endangered species." Keep all this in mind as we consider the press’s treatment of Craigslist. Why didn’t the media choose to brand this guy the “Internet Killer”, “Boston Killer”, “Hotel Killer” or something else? Whether or not it was intentional, the decision to repeat the phrase, “Craigslist Killer,” has caused material brand damage to Craigslist and fanned the flames for the censorship hawks. 


I think Craigslist is also getting way more blame than it deserves. Craigslist is a marketplace. Its job is to provide a platform for people to exchange goods, services and ideas. Just like a shopping mall, market, or square in the physical world. Good and bad things can happen in a marketplace. Because people are good and bad. When someone gets killed, raped, or mugged in Times Square, we don't blame Times Square. 


But while Craigslist is being singled out, there are hundreds of websites that offer classifieds, dating services, and social networking. They all create an opportunity for evil people to prey on victims. Most local yellow pages have a section for “entertainers” or some other forms of adult service. This has been going on for years. What do we think those ads are for? And there are hundreds of places in the off-line world (parks, shopping malls, street corners, etc.) where people can and do commit horrible crimes. 


For Craigslist, this crisis is akin to the Tylenol or Odwalla tragedies, in which users of those products died. Johnson and Johnson and Odwalla, both took quick action with their business practices and showed tremendous public relations acumen as their crises played out. As a result, both still have strong brands today. While the fate of Craigslist can’t be known yet, it is clearly in trouble. 


What should it do now? 


Craigslist has since announced that it will manually review every ad placed for "adult services," a section that was previously labeled "erotic services." But that does not go far enough. Good controls are good business. Many Internet companies have been too lax, relying on users to govern themselves. Craigslist (and other new media business) need to do the online equivalent of installing new street lights, having more patrols, and hooking up security cameras. We need better warnings, additional screening, a rating system for users in the community (the way eBay does), and stronger tracking capabilities of users online. If people know they will be turned over to the authorities when they commit crimes using the Internet, they may think twice. 


Next Craigslist (with the support of other new media businesses) should set up a foundation for victims of violent crimes that are committed by people using the Internet. 


Finally, Craigslist must to do a better PR job. The future of Internet freedom will be voted on in the court of public opinion, before the government rules on it. Craigslist (and most new media companies) have been to quiet and defensive on this issue. Both Craig Newmark, Craigslist’s founder and Buckmaster need to come out of hiding. They need to passionately evangelize what company is doing to help protect users, how it works with law enforcement to catch bad guys, and be an advocate for freedom on the Internet. 


And while we're at it, how about a bit more balance from the old media as well as from the government? It's time to get a handle on things. Nobody has an interest in letting this escalate into a media-driven, government overreaction, which, if left unchecked, could destroy many of the Internet freedoms we now accept as a given. 






By Christopher Lochhead

Why Yahoo MUST Buy Twitter

(Originally posted on CBSNews.com)  This commentary was written by Christopher Lochhead, a former technology executive who now works as a strategy advisor.


Carol Bartz took over a dejected Yahoo in January. Talk about entering 

the lion's den. In her quest to restore the company to its former glory, 

she has to overcome years of blunders, a bad economy, and the continued 

beatings dealt out by Yahoo's dominant rival, Google. In this game of 

corporate survivor, it's going to take all of Bartz's moxie-and then 

some-gained during years as the successful CEO of software maker 

Autodesk. 


On the surface, at least, it appears that she signed up for Mission 

Impossible. Google has been body slamming Yahoo for years. It lays claim 

both to a superior search technology and a stronger advertising business 

model. As for Yahoo, well, think of Mickey Rourke's character in the 

film, `The Wrestler': a one-time star with fading looks and dwindling 

skills in search of one more win. 


Then, last year Microsoft's Steve Ballmer came calling. Microsoft 

offered to buy the company for $44 billion, a 62 percent premium over 

Yahoo's share price at the time. Like a drunk who won't go to rehab, 

Yahoo's board of directors said no. It was a bad bet. Today, Yahoo is 

only worth about $20 billion. 


But give Bartz, who came on board this winter,some credit for trying to improve the company's execution. She's not been afraid to make the tough decisions to reduce costs by laying people off and shedding dead weight. The company recently announced it would shut down GeoCities an early Facebook-like web site that Yahoo purchased during the Internet bubble. That's probably not going to be the end of it. Recent rumors have it that Yahoo plans to sell HotJobs(an online employment site that has consistently lagged Monster.com) as well as Yahoo Personals in an effort to get the company more focused on its core business. 


To be sure, Bartz has got a lot of work to do just to get Yahoo back into fighting trim. The company needs to improve search results and services like 

email, news, weather and sports-all the while reducing costs and 

improving results for advertisers. But that won't be all. Bartz also 

needs to make bold moves to get Yahoo growing. Specifically she needs to 

expand her focus on the future: social and mobile computing (the company 

is No. 1 in mobile search, according to 


rkStudyYahooinTopSpot.html m/>a new report by Gomez, Inc. and 

dotMobi. That's a good start but Yahoo still lags behind when 

it comes to the social revolution taking place on the Internet. To wit, 

Facebook now claims 200 million users. 


This is where Twitter comes in. Twitter has experienced mind-boggling 

1,382% year-over-year user growth, according to Nielsen Online. It's not 

just the geeks: Twitter has attracted the likes of Ashton Kutcher, P. 

Diddy and CNN et al. to the service. In the process, Twitter's got both 

Facebook and Google running scared. 


A Yahoo/Twitter combination-I hereby dub it, "Yatter"-would allow Yahoo 

to combine all of its email and messaging with Twitter into a modern, 

social communication platform. If done well, it would be a very 

compelling service where users could integrate all of their Web 

communications in one place. 


What's more, it would provide Yahoo with explosive new user growth, not 

to mention, a "Who's Who" of celebrity users, and an opportunity to 

cross-sell and up-sell Yahoo services to those tens of millions of 

Twitter users. Even in a recession, advertisers are salivating like 

starving dogs sniffing barbecue steak to get at all those tweets (the 

messages & postings on Twitter). For advertisers, the ability to sell 

ads around keyword searches and Tweets simultaneously could be 

irresistible. 


Buying Twitter would also rate as a savvy defensive move. If Google, 

Microsoft, or Facebook got there first and snapped up Twitter, it would 

leave Yahoo on the mat. Yahoo already missed out on buying MySpace and 

YouTube. Microsoft was first to do an investment in Facebook and now 

there are rumors that Apple might bid $700 million for Twitter. Yahoo 

can ill-afford to let another new Web sensation slip through its hands. 


Also, if the ultimate plan is to sell Yahoo to Microsoft, a Twitter deal 

makes good sense. Who knows? With a few more quarters of clean-up, an 

uptick in the economy, and a growing user-base fueled by Twitter, 

Microsoft may yet be inclined to pay a significant premium (again) for 

Yahoo. Given a second chance, Yahoo's new board hopefully will be sober 

enough to do that deal. 




By Christopher Lochhead

Thursday, April 23, 2009

Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Coverity Reaches For The Big Time

my old friends at Coverity strive to optimize the integrity of software. are they the next mercury?
i wouldn't bet against them.

Legendary night, with a legendary montrealer

last night leonard cohen, lit up oakland @ the beautiful paramount,  in a 3+ hour set. as a long time fan & fellow montrealer, my fear was that the show wouldn't live up to the music. for me when that happens, i can't listen to the music any more. last year i saw steve earl in SF and was really put-off. cohen an amazing songwriter, with a fantastic band, did not disappoint. a GREAT show.

Wednesday, March 25, 2009

Record Number of CEO get Fired In 2008

According to challanger gray & christmas. 

Is Your Company's Missing Q1 Targets?

It seems clear that many companies will miss Q1 numbers & be forced into more layoffs. IBM announced they are cutting 5,000 people today. My prediction is their are a lot more coming. Most companies get this wrong.  Here is a post i wrote for dan farber @ cnet last october that seems even more relevant now:




Wednesday, March 18, 2009

Does IBM Have Sun Stroke?

The rumored IBM purchase of Sun for $7 billion dollars will likely turn out to be a blunder.  while, Sun does have some compelling technology and a large customer base,    they are a dying franchise. why not just offer Sun customers a compelling trade-in offer and hire away some of their smartest people?

Right now enterprise customers want more cloud technologies they can purchase as a service. Capex bad, opex good. Why wouldn’t IBM invest the $7 billion in creating the services and products of the future rather than lapping up the past?