
Justin.tv Is Turning Porn Queries Into Cash - vaksel
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/02/16/justintv-is-redirecting-porn-queries-into-cash/
======
emmett
Techcrunch didn't include the comment on the story we sent them, but here it
is:

Justin.tv uses a variety of common tools to effectively reduce the amount of
inappropriate content on the site including: community-based reporting,
community admins, chat moderation and redirecting sex-related search queries.

Lets be clear, this isn't the magical solution for monetizing Web 2.0, these
tools exclusively help us to improve the community experience on the site.

------
mattmaroon
"the site should really include a page confirming that the user is over 18
before redirecting them"

Yes, because 16 year old boys who searched for porn are going to click no when
asked if they're over 18.

~~~
anuraggoel
Wouldn't such a confirmation be needed purely for legal reasons?

~~~
mattmaroon
I'm not a lawyer, but my guess would be no since it's merely a link to a third
party. I'd guess the third party has the responsibility to ask that question.

On the other hand, I'm not a lawyer.

~~~
anuraggoel
On the third-party point, I think that's the reason they say:

" _(there seems to be no such confirmation found on at least some of the
redirected porn sites)._ "

------
jackowayed
This is awesome.

People who want porn get porn. People who want money (ie Justin.tv) get money.

Unfortunately, there are definitely issues.

Some 8-year-old kid is going to search for the awesome new channel about
secant that everyone in 3rd grade is talking about. Since the c is next to the
x, he's going to accidentally type "sex" instead of "sec". 5 seconds later, he
says "mommy, what is that?", and 10 seconds later Justin.tv has a very, very
angry parent on their hands.

Ok, maybe that's a little unrealistic. But people are going to complain about
it.

~~~
emmett
You'd think they would, but we've been running this for a long time already
and other than this silly kerfluffle, there haven't really been complaints.
And believe me, our users love to complain (that's why we love our users!)

------
rms
From another post here, I am absolutely amazed that a search for xxx or sex on
Google takes you to flash video based full length hardcore porn. I didn't
realize it was that easy these days. What Justin.tv is doing is no different
or worse than Google. I would expect Justin.tv is banned by every parental
filter anyways.

~~~
jackowayed
They don't need to be banned.

It's a redirect. So as long as the actual porn site is blocked, Justin.tv
doesn't need to be. Normal Justin.tv is fine, and if someone does get
redirected to porn, the filter should grab it there when it tries to load hot-
porn.com or whatever.

~~~
Dilpil
Something tells me that the people who run porn censoring groups won't follow
your logic.

------
fallentimes
While it's cool to see them trying out some unconventional ways of
monetization, I have a feeling this won't last for very long.

~~~
mikeyur
There will probably be some complaints from parents or some being redirected
to porn sites, but what do you expect? If parents are so offended they should
talk to their child about searching for porn on the internet rather than
complaining.

If some kid turns 'safe search' off in google and types in 'porn' - will the
parents get mad at google?

~~~
jonursenbach
When was the last time a parent actually talked to their child instead of
complaining about it being someonelse's problem?

~~~
anewaccountname
I'm pretty sure we only get to hear the ones that complain.

------
larryfreeman
The fact that this story is so controversial (read the comments on TechCrunch)
really shows that Justin.TV will probably stop doing this soon.

Interesting idea to give the adult searchers what they really want. The
problem is that adult content is still too taboo for many folks.

~~~
evdawg
I would barely call some TechCrunch comments "controversy". That site has some
serious youtube-style lowest-denominator-of-society commenting going on. The
troll to constructive comment ratio is like 9:1.

~~~
larryfreeman
In my view and in my experience, many of the comments on this particular
article do represent the general public out there.

The roughly same comments are found in this thread on Hacker News.

We are unfortunately still living in a time when many people are not open
minded.

-Larry

------
debt
Does JTV really feel comfortable directing kids to porn? I am a fan of porn,
but I'd feel uncomfortable having a hand in making porn so easily accessible
to kids.

~~~
likpok
If someone is searching for porn or xxx or whatever is flagged, then they
_certainly_ can get it elsewhere on the internet. Justin.tv is not directing
them to it, they would have already found out how to find it.

~~~
debt
[http://www.justin.tv/search?q=porn&commit=Search&sec...](http://www.justin.tv/search?q=porn&commit=Search&section=)

Justin.tv directs me to a porn site.

It's wrong to just blindly forward people to porn when most of them are
younger kids.

------
holdenpage
I really don't see any issue with this quite honestly.

If a parent has an issue then either talk to your kid about NOT searching for
porn or simply block the site.

~~~
kajecounterhack
Seriously I read somewhere that someone complained about the word "Sexy"
turning up a porn result.

Is that over the top? Maybe. But think about who looks up the word "Sexy" on a
live video stream... I think they're on the right track in some way. Well, I
don't necessarily think they're doing the _right_ thing like this, but
certainly if you have moral qualms with it, feel free to not use their
service. I'm not sure this is a reason to stop using their service. Still, I
think it might be better if maybe they had a button that said "Yes, redirect
me" instead of only waiting five (only five?) seconds. Or, if Justin.tv is
really using this to keep bad content off their site, why don't they block
those terms completely? It's not like redirecting users to a porn site is the
best alternative...not to mention all this bad press.

------
Mystalic
It just screams of desperation. It may make sense, but do you think they'll be
able to keep their community this way?

~~~
justin
Yes, because we only redirect people who are searching for porn, and those
people aren't actually part of the community.

~~~
Mystalic
Okay, here's how I see it, Justin:

You have forever tied the reputation and business of Justin.tv to porn. It
doesn't matter if you host it or not, it doesn't matter if you warn users, you
are forever associated with a market that millions of advertisers, investors,
and users are adverse to. The TechCrunch porn article is already beginning to
appear in search results - how long until any search for your website has
articles about you and porn on it? And how long will casual users watch until
they bounce?

It screams desperation because it isn't a business model, it's a stop-gap. The
streaming video websites, including you, have yet to prove that you can make
sustainable revenues that trump costs, which is the point of every business on
the planet.

Once you realize that you've tarnished the reputation of Justin.tv forever and
that it will create an artificial barrier to growth, it will be too late.

At least, that's how I see it.

~~~
justin
Over 30 million people come to the site or view JTV embeds every month. I
don't think the community will disappear because of any one news story. We've
had our fair share of bad press, but I'll be the first to say it's not the end
of the world and that today's sensational news will be forgotten when the next
story hits.

Lots of people inside the tech industry don't get it, but Justin.tv is bigger
than Techcrunch, gets more pageviews than Digg, does about as many video
streams per month as Hulu, and is largely used by people outside the tech
sector who neither know nor care about the politics of Silicon Valley. Those
people are gamers, music fans, and social networkers from all around the
world; they like the site for what it is and for the service it provides, not
for how it is portrayed in the media.

Lastly, this isn't a monetization method. If it was, we'd remove it from the
site because it doesn't really make any money. What it does do is serve as a
tarpit for users searching for content that doesn't have a place on our site.
And ultimately we've found that in conjunction with our other community
moderation tools, we've significantly reduced abuse incidences on the site.
Which is a win for our community.

~~~
jacquesm
I think it is a fine strategy. WW.com does much the same thing, has been doing
that for years and we think it is one of our better gimmicks, to get our
'abusers' to fund the site for your 'users'.

It functions as an escape valve for an element that you will attract anyway,
no matter how much work you put into keeping things clean.

Your observation about the news is spot on, we once had a guy hang himself on
camera before we caught on to what was happening, lots of bad press, angry
letters from users and so on, within 5 days of the event things were back to
normal. Still one of the most shocking experiences in my career.

------
muon
It's the natural thing to do but at what cost?

~~~
jrockway
The users that search for porn get porn. Justin.tv gets money. I fail to see
how this is a poor business model.

Oh yeah, sex is evil. I get it.

