SF Bay Guardian: undermine this

As the classified advertising revenues of newspapers, both daily and weekly, continued to be undermined by free or cheap internet sites like Craigslist, old-style media analysts are clutching their heads. It's one thing for the internet to steal readers from print-and-ink publications, it's another to steal their classified advertisers, who historically provide a huge part of a newspaper's revenue.

Now the SF Bay Guardian, an independent alt-weekly, is attempting to undermine the competition by planting doubt about Craigslist founder Craig Newmark's motives and "community building" rhetoric.

Obviously the Bay Guardian, and every newspaper, has a vested interest in defending its classified advertising, so one question is, who covers this story? Old-media outlets like the Bay Guardian who haven't figured out how to make money off their websites? New-media outlets who have no sympathy for the 20th century types?

Tim Redmond's piece in the SFBG makes a good point: Newmark's touchy-feely rhetoric should be questioned, along with his motives. And yes, it should be recognized that Craigslist is a for-profit company. But so is the Bay Guardian. Sounds like the pot calling the kettle dark gray to me.

And by the way -- just do a Google News search on the string "Classified advertising," and you'll immediately see stories reporting financial results from several newspaper chains that say classified advertising is up recently. What are the SFBG's figures? Who knows, it's not a public company. But maybe not so great, if they're resorting to attacking Craig Newmark instead of his company.

Craigslist, Craig Newmark, Tim Redmond, newspapers, advertizing