New York Times article on camming

[galactic6]

I came here to see what folks are saying about this NY Times article on camming and see that it hasn't been posted yet.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/22/technology/intimacy-on-the-web-with-a-crowd.html

It is so weird to see this stuff I enjoy written up in the Gray Lady.

 

[AmberCutie]

It seems to have an overall positive feeling to it, that's great!

"Big earners get to keep more of their tips" is a big inaccuracy though.

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

Thank you for posting it. I'm also curious as to reactions.

Doing this interview was a rollercoaster ride. Sometimes I felt like Matt completely understood where I was coming from, and this industry - other times I didn't.

I hate this last concluding line "In this case, though, the opportunities show how this business can escalate, inviting potential hazard by further blurring the lines between the virtual and the real."

its so vague and dangerous sounding.. its been 3 yrs and my hazards haven't escalated, they've gone DOWN because I've got SMARTER.

There were a few inaccuracies .
He never mentioned that Jim no longer works for me for one. Or that normally he's not at my house, but in his apartment but the reporter wanted to see him working while being near me doing my show.

And the big earners get more of their tips thing i think he was referring to top 100??? but yeah, inaccurate.

I will say he did fact check again and again with me.. not sure how he missed that one.

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

He focussed a lot on the fact that i keep statistics on tippers... 'tracking their behavior' which is.. not really all that creepy but it sounds creepy. Basically I track it so i could do leader of the pack and stuff like that, and make sure i was sending content etc.

A few other notes.. I was dissapointed that the ONE quote he took from duke was negative - none of the positives that could have been said about how supportive duke is.

He didnt mention duke and I met on mfc - which KINDA seems important..instead fixating on my relationship with my ex husband which seemed more important to him?

And he took ONE quote from my friendship with 'alex' as 'complicated'

I said COMPLICATED when he tried to get me to pin down how exactly a FREINDSHIP could be real, and still have money involved... I tried to explain it like 'you can be friends with your hairdresser cant you??" but he didnt put that in.

And i feel like it came across differently because of that...

I also think he didnt balance the fact that 'yes this job is risky' with 'lots of jobs are risky'
i remember telling him - really emphasizing that my previous job put me in more dangerous situations daily - i was in conflicts with people, aggressive dogs, dog fights, etc etc. I was doing ANIMAL CONTROL work.. but no one writes long articles about how 'risky' that is.


Very conflicted right now.. and very curious to see how ya'll feel??

 

[JickyJuly]

I like that they focused on Lacey's business practices with her being in charge.
I thought it was a little tacky for them to spell out exact dollar amounts for shows. I doubt they would have done that for any other occupation.
It was cool that they made it clear some of her time is spent hanging around talking about platonic things like her dog chewing a cable.

It did feel a little like they wanted to play devil's advocate to Lacey's positive experience, but couldn't quite manage. Win goes to Lacey! Hehehe. But, I think their desire to go in another direction kind of muddled the story as a whole.

I disliked that they made it sound like the enemy of all camgirls is being outed. I'm sure the number of us that have given up the ghost and come out is not that minute.
I disliked his portrayal of "Alex" and the use of the word loner. Super cliche. There are as many types of dudes on MFC as there are in the world.

 

[ThunderWeasel]

They have to play into SOME kind of stigmatization. God forbid a major media outlet treat camming as anything BUT a dangerous, less-than-savory line of work.

 

[Sevrin]

It seems to have an overall positive feeling to it, that's great!

"Big earners get to keep more of their tips" is a big inaccuracy though.

Some studios give a bigger percentage of earnings to models who earn more per pay period. Lower earners might get 50%, while those who earn more can take in up to 65%.

 

[spankamber]

He focussed a lot on the fact that i keep statistics on tippers... 'tracking their behavior' which is.. not really all that creepy but it sounds creepy. Basically I track it so i could do leader of the pack and stuff like that, and make sure i was sending content etc.

A few other notes.. I was dissapointed that the ONE quote he took from duke was negative - none of the positives that could have been said about how supportive duke is.

He didnt mention duke and I met on mfc - which KINDA seems important..instead fixating on my relationship with my ex husband which seemed more important to him?

And he took ONE quote from my friendship with 'alex' as 'complicated'

I said COMPLICATED when he tried to get me to pin down how exactly a FREINDSHIP could be real, and still have money involved... I tried to explain it like 'you can be friends with your hairdresser cant you??" but he didnt put that in.

And i feel like it came across differently because of that...

I also think he didnt balance the fact that 'yes this job is risky' with 'lots of jobs are risky'
i remember telling him - really emphasizing that my previous job put me in more dangerous situations daily - i was in conflicts with people, aggressive dogs, dog fights, etc etc. I was doing ANIMAL CONTROL work.. but no one writes long articles about how 'risky' that is.


Very conflicted right now.. and very curious to see how ya'll feel??

That's a great follow up can you write that to the editor or at least post that as a comment on the new york times website?

I think it is pretty rad publicity wise that you're in the nytimes!!

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

He focussed a lot on the fact that i keep statistics on tippers... 'tracking their behavior' which is.. not really all that creepy but it sounds creepy. Basically I track it so i could do leader of the pack and stuff like that, and make sure i was sending content etc.

A few other notes.. I was dissapointed that the ONE quote he took from duke was negative - none of the positives that could have been said about how supportive duke is.

He didnt mention duke and I met on mfc - which KINDA seems important..instead fixating on my relationship with my ex husband which seemed more important to him?

And he took ONE quote from my friendship with 'alex' as 'complicated'

I said COMPLICATED when he tried to get me to pin down how exactly a FREINDSHIP could be real, and still have money involved... I tried to explain it like 'you can be friends with your hairdresser cant you??" but he didnt put that in.

And i feel like it came across differently because of that...

I also think he didnt balance the fact that 'yes this job is risky' with 'lots of jobs are risky'
i remember telling him - really emphasizing that my previous job put me in more dangerous situations daily - i was in conflicts with people, aggressive dogs, dog fights, etc etc. I was doing ANIMAL CONTROL work.. but no one writes long articles about how 'risky' that is.


Very conflicted right now.. and very curious to see how ya'll feel??

That's a great follow up can you write that to the editor or at least post that as a comment on the but website?

I think I will probably write a better thought out comment/post in a day or two once the dust settles. Thanks.

Do they have a comment section?? i cant find it!

 

[JickyJuly]

Still thinking about the article. Decided that the writer is just not very engaging. He could have put more character development into Lacey. I mean, you're pretty open about yourself, and you lead an atypical/interesting life. He didn't really utilize that to make you sound good or bad or fascinating or anything. It's just like he took bits of info and a few numbers, threw them down and called it a day. If I had his notes, I could make something interesting and memorable at least (and my brain doesn't like to do work). He should find a less creative field for himself if he can't make a day with a sex worker into an epic story of SOME kind.

They have to play into SOME kind of stigmatization. God forbid a major media outlet treat camming as anything BUT a dangerous, less-than-savory line of work.

My most dangerous camming moment was falling on my ass after getting very drunk on cam in the bathtub. To be fair, it could have happened without the camera just as easily. Oh, the perils! :lol:

 

[spankamber]

He focussed a lot on the fact that i keep statistics on tippers... 'tracking their behavior' which is.. not really all that creepy but it sounds creepy. Basically I track it so i could do leader of the pack and stuff like that, and make sure i was sending content etc.

A few other notes.. I was dissapointed that the ONE quote he took from duke was negative - none of the positives that could have been said about how supportive duke is.

He didnt mention duke and I met on mfc - which KINDA seems important..instead fixating on my relationship with my ex husband which seemed more important to him?

And he took ONE quote from my friendship with 'alex' as 'complicated'

I said COMPLICATED when he tried to get me to pin down how exactly a FREINDSHIP could be real, and still have money involved... I tried to explain it like 'you can be friends with your hairdresser cant you??" but he didnt put that in.

And i feel like it came across differently because of that...

I also think he didnt balance the fact that 'yes this job is risky' with 'lots of jobs are risky'
i remember telling him - really emphasizing that my previous job put me in more dangerous situations daily - i was in conflicts with people, aggressive dogs, dog fights, etc etc. I was doing ANIMAL CONTROL work.. but no one writes long articles about how 'risky' that is.


Very conflicted right now.. and very curious to see how ya'll feel??

That's a great follow up can you write that to the editor or at least post that as a comment on the but website?

I think I will probably write a better thought out comment/post in a day or two once the dust settles. Thanks.

Do they have a comment section?? i cant find it!

Can't find the comment section for your article but found it on others. I'm on my phone right now maybe you have to me a member of New York Times to post comments?

 

[BigElectricCat]

There were a few inaccuracies .

I was waiting to see what you were going to say before chiming in, especially if you had to debunk some bad journalism.

Staging the former employee at your studio was a bit questionable if that's not the way you usually worked. That's only going to fuel some perv's "screw the crew" fantasy. I'm sure you'll get a laugh at the resumés that start appearing in your MFC mail, all of them from guys willing to move to NO without relocation assistance.

While I can't say anything about how Matt Richtel puts together his stories, or how his editors may mangle them prior to publication, I can say journalists have to know a lot of things, but aren't necessarily experts on much of anything. Back when I was in college working for the student media, I sure wasn't. If it wasn't for news writing, they only thing I would have been good for was appearing on Jeopardy! It's not surprising he sometimes didn't seem to understand. For all we know he may be a sheltered Upper East Sider, and the most adventurous thing he's ever done was ride the Subway to LaGuardia. That said, the finished piece wasn't slanted too far, though he did work in the obligatory whining from traditional porn studios and the specter of sex slavery. He also slighted Duke in favor of your ex because readers like breakups more than the relationships where things work out. I don't even want to start on the Alex bit. Richtel made him out to be a total creeper. It's not a crime for someone thousands of miles away to fall in love with you (to the extent they can under the circumstances). It's only a problem if it makes you uncomfortable or wrecks his own life. And the whole "This is mutual objectification" bit? That quote manages to dehumanize both models and pervs.

Still it's better than being profiled in Rolling Stone. They would have just made shit up.

 

[RogueWarrior]

Very conflicted right now.. and very curious to see how ya'll feel??

Though not complete, I think it was pretty fair. Other than the last paragraph.

Trying to look at it from the perspective of someone who knows absolutely nothing about camming. It doesn't come off as judgemental, very straight forward.

You know what you said, he knows what you said. You would have liked it to have been written a bit differently, he had his own agenda. Overall, I think it was positive. At least as positive as something in the mainstream media is going to be.

Those of us on either side of the cam will tend to be hyper-critical and nitpick any flaws in the article because of our experiences. You were in the New York Times. There's that. And as long as you weren't misquoted, what was left incomplete...well, that's on the reporter.

And there you have it. That's how I feel.

 

[southsamurai]

yeah, the journalist could have done a better job of being balanced with his viewpoints. not too bad really, but definitely skewed for titillation (big surprise!). but as far as miss lolli goes, as usual what she was quoted as saying was smart, direct and informative. that he didnt quote thoroughly and correctly based on reality doesnt mean that what she said is any less true.

for me if i was a stranger to cam land and read that article id have to check it out honestly.

 

[Sevrin]

I think it was pretty gutsy of you to lay your life and work open to a reporter like that. :handgestures-salute:

Being a serious cam model is pretty complicated business, and I think the reporter's aim was to place it in the context of sex work in general. He certainly wanted to avoid glamorizing it, lest he be seen as encouraging young people to get into it. Overall, you came off as level-headed and professional imo. It could have been a LOT worse!

 

[bawksy]

I think the most dramatic part of the story was the bit about how a regular big tipper got you to cross your personal boundary lines because you were afraid of losing him. I think many cam girls have encountered situations like this. It's an interesting psychology study on power and control.

 

[pg240]

I did like this passage from the article:

Models like Lacey think of themselves as digital geishas, therapists, consorts, virtual performance artists. Unlike traditional pornography, or even old-school peep shows, the cam medium titillates with the promise of virtual friendship.

“They’re defining a new kind of intimacy,” said Viviana Zelizer, a Princeton sociologist and author of “The Purchase of Intimacy,” about the interplay between economics and relationships. It’s not traditional sex work, not a relationship, but “something in between.”

All in all, it was a decent piece of journalism. But all it takes is one inaccurate statement to begin questioning others.

Bottom line for me: Bravo to Miss_Lollipop for putting herself out there in this manner. Let us know if your traffic spikes!!

 

[Brad]

I think it's great that you are in the NY Times Lolli!
:thumbleft:

Overall I believe the reporter portrayed you in a good light even considering some of the things that you mentioned. I think you are far more interesting then the reporter touched on but I understand their focus was more on the camming aspect then your personality. That part is too bad because I think you rock!
:-D

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Everyone should be interviewed a few times in their life , or even better sit in while somebody else is interviewed, to get an understanding of the process of how old school journalism works. As a general rule (with many exceptions) the bigger the media outlet the higher accuracy. Accuracy is really a function of the editor and the fact checking person an reporter. Congrats Lacie you started at the top.

I think this is an example of good journalism. It was in the technology section so I thought the emphasis on the business aspect was entirely appropriate. I am little surprised that no discussion of broadband or technology. FYI, His traffic number were completely consistent with what I've found using a different web measuring sites. A billion dollar business also sounds like it is the right ball park. This would have be a different article if was in the lifestyle.
But still an article about Lacie with no mention of her big boobs and engaging smile, maybe he was gay :lol:

Lacie came across as savvy businesswoman and entrepreneur which I think is about as positive spin as you could hope for. "No mom I'm not a porn star, I'm internet entrepreneur just like this girl Lacie in the NY Times article." Considering that I think Lacie is one of the most business savvy camgirls on MFC, I think it is very fortunate for the industry that she got interviewed and not some of the younger models.

also think he didnt balance the fact that 'yes this job is risky' with 'lots of jobs are risky'
i remember telling him - really emphasizing that my previous job put me in more dangerous situations daily - i was in conflicts with people, aggressive dogs, dog fights, etc etc. I was doing ANIMAL CONTROL work.. but no one writes long articles about how 'risky' that is.

Sorry I don't think you can have it both ways, either Camming is risky or it isn't. The reporter obviously visited ACF and/or stripperweb. A new person on the forum is going to see countless threads about members wanting to meet, the dangers of using skype, having a stage name, stalking, being outed, finding a job after camming, and members being obsessed with a model yada yada. Now how risky camming compared to other jobs, like working in a kennel, I have my doubts. But objectively reading this forum and even your own discussion of Alex and the need to have security while meeting a member makes camming seem dangerous so I can't fault him.

One question since you've been in New Orleans for a while when was the interview done and when did they call and do fact checking?

 

[schlmoe]

I like that they focused on Lacey's business practices with her being in charge.

IMO, this is the big win. To profile a sex worker and have the above as the big take-away is huge. Then add in that the tone was not sneering or sniggering at the sex part (describing the "show"), is great and almost unheard of in mainstream media today.

All in all, not too bad. Well, except for the bit about your "loner" member...

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

just logged off after my first time on cam since it ran.

Lots of prems in my room i dont know coming in and congratulating me on the article.. overwhelmingly the reaction was positive

I'm feeling good so far Your responses have really helped me understand .. more about how this article was put together, came together etc.

my 'dissapointments' are relatively minor.. and expected with the media. I do realize that! I think it could have been a LOT worse in tone.. and im glad he went into the depth he did.

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

One question since you've been in New Orleans for a while when was the interview done and when did they call and do fact checking?

they'd id fact checking about 3 times - there were three false 'starts' for this article.

It was about 6 months ago that the article was done.

 

[mynameisbob84]

Interesting read, but also something of a missed opportunity. I agree with Jicky about the article not being as engaging as it could have been. It might not totally be the writer's fault (his article would likely have gone through a bunch of changes after he submitted it) and the tone of the article would have probably been dictated to him by his editor. It wasn't a particularly well written article though, which is a shame because the subject matter deserved better, and it sounds like Lacey/Lolli's interview gave him a lot of interesting stuff to work with that, for whatever reason, just didn't fit the narrative he decided on. That might be sour grapes talking though. Now that I've finished my journalism degree I can't help but cast an overly critical eye on articles in major newspapers that weren't written by me (which is all of them) :?

The stuff I dug:

The article made clear the risks of camming as well as the potential rewards
It was pretty balanced and didn't condemn camming
The "behind the scenes" stuff - I had no idea models hired assistants (is this common?)
That the article stressed the fact that models (typically) are their own bosses and are earning money for themselves as opposed to some behind-the-scenes pimp

The stuff I didn't dig:

It felt like it was missing a lot of colour in between the 'introduction to camming' stuff and the facts and figures. That the writer didn't use Lolli's quotes about meeting her husband on MFC seems especially odd. It could have led nicely to some exploration of the model/member paradigm which, other than the mention of the high-tipping member, was pretty much lacking.

It didn't really give a sense of what it's like to put in a shift on cam. What does the average shift take out of a model physically, mentally? How does a good shift differ to a bad shift? What are the best things about the job? The worst things? What happens when things aren't going to plan? What's it like having to log on and entertain people when you're feeling like shit? What does it feel like to recieve a huge fucking mega-tip? What's it like having to log on the day before payday not knowing if you're going to make enough money to pay rent for the month? I felt like some of that could have maybe been conveyed in the article.

:twocents-02cents:

 

[WillowJames]

Man. I did NOT expect to see the NYTimes open to this article on my friend's kitchen island this morning!! They have no idea that I'm a cam model, so I just casually glanced at it and put it back down. I was DYING to get home to read it and discuss on the forum!!

I was pretty happy with the overall positivity of the piece. My only issue was the section about Kathryn Griffin's opinion:

"Even those women who become cam models of their own free will take on serious risks associated with sex work, Ms. Griffin said. Those risks, she said, run from the low self-esteem that comes from working on the margins of society, to using drugs to cope with a job that can feel shameful, to getting into other activities, whether stripping in a club or prostitution. The still-unsolved murders on Long Island of women who advertised as prostitutes on Craigslist also speak to the risks of going it alone in the sex industry.

“The longer they do it, the more vulnerable they become to going to the next stage and the next stage,” Ms. Griffin said of camming."

Maybe I'm biased because of my camming community (MFC regulars and forum members), but I really think that is an inaccurate statement and assumptions. I definitely don't see myself or any other models I've gotten to know headed in that direction. And then, to end the article implying that Lolli is headed there... that sucked.

But, way to go Lolli! I loved the pictures, too.

 

[Just Me]

Interesting article, decently written and fairly objective. Being in the technology section there was very little mentioned about the technology behind cam sites and camming and what the future of the technology might hold in store for the industry.

I would have liked to have seen the writer question LiveJasmin's success and web traffic since I feel the vast majority of the visits they get are crappy popup windows when people are visiting other sites. I found it interesting that Kink.com is going into the cam studio business and that the regular porn industry feels the cam industry is taking such a big chunk out of their business. I had not heard that voiced before. I did chuckle a bit at this statement:

“If you’re the middle guy who has been eating off this industry for 20 years, it’s a big change,” said Mr. Blatt, 45, who recently sold the last of his Ferraris. “The girls don’t need anybody.”

Goes to show, if you do not keep up with the trends in any business you might be looking for a new job. The middle man job still isn't going away though, the cam sites have just taken over the role. So, it is not quite true that the girls don't need anyone. Traffic, marketing and advertising are still needed to be successful.

The metrics being kept on customers is always going to appear creepy and upset some people. This is a danger of more openness and and more attention on the industry, destroying the illusion for some members. Drawing back the curtain and revealing "the wizard", is going to turn off some people to the business of cam modeling and cam sites.

Where you able to ask the reporter/writer any questions? I would have liked to known whether it was an assigned piece or the writer came to it through their own curiosity. Also, whether they had personally been to a cam site before the interest in writing the article.

 

[ThunderWeasel]

I was pretty happy with the overall positivity of the piece. My only issue was the section about Kathryn Griffin's opinion:

"Even those women who become cam models of their own free will take on serious risks associated with sex work, Ms. Griffin said. Those risks, she said, run from the low self-esteem that comes from working on the margins of society, to using drugs to cope with a job that can feel shameful, to getting into other activities, whether stripping in a club or prostitution. The still-unsolved murders on Long Island of women who advertised as prostitutes on Craigslist also speak to the risks of going it alone in the sex industry.

“The longer they do it, the more vulnerable they become to going to the next stage and the next stage,” Ms. Griffin said of camming."

Maybe I'm biased because of my camming community (MFC regulars and forum members), but I really think that is an inaccurate statement and assumptions. I definitely don't see myself or any other models I've gotten to know headed in that direction. And then, to end the article implying that Lolli is headed there... that sucked.

They HAVE to have a negative slant in there. There's no WAY a mainstream media piece can EVER present any type of "adult entertainment" without adding a doom & gloom scenario. They have to pander to the stigma that it is ALWAYS a "dangerous and unsavory" practice.

 

[Miss_Lollipop]

for those curious about the impact on traffic...

My clips4sale traffic and sales are thru the roof. I havent posted anything new in days so i should not be selling lots of videos (when you post stuff, you get seen) and yet my stuff is selling like crazy.

 

[HiGirlsRHot]

Can't find the comment section for your article but found it on others. I'm on my phone right now maybe you have to me a member of New York Times to post comments?

Turns out the NY Times only enables comments on certain articles, a minority. Sadly Lacie's article isn't one of them

 

[BigElectricCat]

Turns out the NY Times only enables comments on certain articles, a minority. Sadly Lacie's article isn't one of them

I think it's better this way. I don't think I'd want to see what the typical newspaper comment poster would say. I know, at least in the city I call home, the people who respond to newspaper articles are blithering idiots.

 

[JosieDeHart]

I feel like there was a big emphasis on the money. Talking specifically about income makes makes me uncomfortable, especially since it can be so varied in this business. I suppose they thought the only way to make camming seem legitimate was to mention the amount of money you make in a month, that it's not pocket change but a thriving business. There always seems to be this loose "damsel in distress" undertone to articles I read when women need money and turn to sex work.

I thought the article depicted you personally as a strong, independent woman. I think I just quoted Beyoncé but it's true. You came across as articulate and very put together and in charge of your business.

I'm glad you cleared that up about Jim because when I read that article I thought, "hmmm, that's interesting, he's in the next room? Wonder if that gets weird? I wonder if he moved too?" I was all sorts of confused.