Jim Buckmaster, CEO of Craigslist, has posted not one, not two, not three, but five lengthy items to the Craigslist blog in response to the fallout from our Craigslist special issue of Classified Intelligence Report.

Peter M. Zollman

In brief order:
— He notes a campaign on Twitter demanding that Craigslist shut down its personals, and he defends them as a valuable service — accusing opponents of the personals of “cynical misuse” of the cause of fighting sex trafficking as a morality play to eliminate the personals. There’s one we agree with him on. Even if there are ads for prostitutes on Craigslist (and that’s indisputable), why on earth would that be cause to shut down its personals? Craigslist personals serve an extraordinarily valuable service. Tell those Twitterers to shut up! Please.

— Buckmaster reports on the Craigslist Charitable Fund, launched in 2008 and funded by Craigslist. But none of the organization’s filings with the federal government are public yet, and if it was indeed funded with $2.7 million, and it focuses on a long list of subject areas as outlined by Buckmaster, why on earth wouldn’t it publish information on its financials and its grants? Newmark and Buckmaster are entitled to support any causes they like, and Craigslist is too (although minority shareholder EBay might have something to say about that — whether it’s a 23 percent stakeholder or a 28 percent stakeholder). But if Craigslist itself is such a “community,” as Newmark and Buckmaster constantly claim, why not tell the community what’s being done with the money it’s spending. Let’s have a little transparency here, guys!

— He slams Brad Stone of The New York Times, whose article based heavily on our research kicked off the latest “get the hooker ads off Craigslist” frenzy. But Buckmaster’s argument is “Well, Backpage is much worse than we are.” Quite true. We say that often. If some of Craigslist’s ads are sleazy, Backpage is a veritable cesspool. But so what? One of the comments to Buckmaster’s blog-post sums it up perfectly: “Be careful not to think that blame-shifting is a scapegoat. … ‘Hey, those guys are worse than we are!’ is not a valid argument … . Sorry it seems like you’re being picked on. I hope we’re just calling you to an even higher standard.”

– Buckmaster rails against the “grandstanding” state attorneys general who are attacking Craigslist for political aims. Another point we agree on. Jeepers — presumably all of those AGs attended law school and got their law degrees. All they have to do is read the Communications Decency Act and the court rulings it has engendered to understand that they’re just blowing smoke. Chase human trafficking, if you wish. Chase prostitutes, if you wish (although don’t AGs have more important things to do with their time?). But don’t chase Craigslist for political purposes for doing something that’s totally legal. Grandstanding is an understatement. Oh, and BTW, Craigslist made the AGs look like chumps by sidestepping the hard-fought and carefully crafted agreement it signed about “erotic services” ads. The AGs blew it, pure and simple, on that one. More grandstanding won’t change the situation.

— Finally, he says Connecticut attorney general Richard Blumenthal is “pointing a misguided finger of blame” at Craigslist, “a faithful partner of law enforcement.” He says the site is “extremely law enforcement friendly – we are known for our responsiveness to law enforcement inquiries, and we actively assist in sweeps and stings – and those foolish enough to misuse the site in connection with crime are disproportionately likely to get caught.” That may be true — and we’ve never heard of Backpage helping law enforcement (and we wonder what readers of the Village Voice would say if it did) — but, so what? Again. Any responsible company should and would help law enforcement if its site (or publication, for that matter) were used to facilitate a crime. There’s no doubt Craigslist helped Massachusetts authorities track down and catch the suspected “Craigslist killer.” Should we send Buckmaster a prize? A reward? A pat on the back? Bah.

Although the gender is incorrect in this case, the quote from Hamlet says it all:

“The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”