Has anyone else noticed the ad banners on The Washington Post website? Some are for The Economist, some are for ING Bank, and some are for an online dating service. Nothing weird about that. Plenty of websites have dating service advertisements. This one promises young Washington women who are single and available.
I'm loathe to write about this since it makes me look like a bit of a perv, but a scoop is a scoop. I know for a fact that the women advertised on these ad banners are not from Washington. Recently I've noticed that when I'm reading the latest stories about 14-year-olds being shot dead, I have porn stars staring back at me. I don't find it offensive or anything. I'm no Bible-thumper. I just find it, well, weird. And if you're a lonely Washington bachelor turning to online dating**, deceptive.
Let's take a look at Sandy2568 here. She's kind of cute! The ad claims she's a 22-year-old from Washington. This banner seems to be the most common one on the Post website. It didn't take me long to realize that this woman was no Sandy. She was a Luna. As in Luna Lane. (Please note that this is the safest (for work) link I could find with a picture of her. No nudity or anything like that. Despite my efforts, this link is wildly nsfw.) Judging from her picture and her, um, body of work that I'm familiar with, I am 100% confident that Sandy and Luna are one and the same.
Later, I found this banner. Let's all give Maggeee7231 a big Washington "hello!" She's another 22-year-old from Washington and could definitely be called a looker.
When I noticed this picture I knew immediately that she was a porn star. Why? Because it's one of those porn stars who also happened to be very, very famous. Famous enough to have a Bloodhound Gang song named after her. Truly the apex of pornographic fame. I am 75% sure that Maggeee is actually none other than Chasey Lain (again, no nudity, but nsfw). I admit that this one is a little less obvious than the Sandy-Luna connection, but if you put a gun to my head I would say that Maggeee and Chasey are one and the same (the green eyes are a giveaway).
Unfortunately, Mate 1's website is of little help. It's only accessible to members (just like DC late Night Shots!) and I am not paying them for the sake of a blog post. It should be noted that the website features zero porn stars (that I recognize anyways). It also should be noted that women can join Mate 1 for free!!!
Does this seem strange to anyone else? The Washington Post is posting advertisements that are patently false. I mean, everyone knows dating ads tend to be full of shit, but shouldn't the Post go above and beyond what other websites use as advertisements? These ads are a glancing blow at the paper's credibility. They shouldn't be taking money from a company that uses stock photos of adult film stars to turn a profit.
* I apologize for the layout of this post. I am computer illiterate and had to deal with Microsoft Paint to get the banners published on to Blogspot. I know it's unsightly but it's the best I could do.
**I do not qualify for this category thank you very much.
So wait, where do i sign up for a date with two pornstars??
ReplyDeleteI thought you could only do that in Vegas. Who knew DC was so liberal.
You should make it so your links open in a new window. Would make it much easier to do a side by side comparison of your porn stars :)
ReplyDeleteAlso would be helpful for other blog posts...
I have no idea how to do that. Tell me and I'd be glad to make the change.
ReplyDeleteI did both those girls.
ReplyDeleteMy work system denied those links b/c they were classified as inappropriate--so I'll look at home.
ReplyDeleteDamn, Rusty, you sound like you are computer literate and quite conversant on the subject at... hand.
One of the creepiest things about those ads is that they actually check your IP in order to tell you where the girls are.
ReplyDeleteWhen I was visiting family in New Jersey a few weeks ago, I pulled up the Washington Post website and they had the exact same ads except the locations had the name of the town that I was visiting rather than Washington.
opening links in new windows:
ReplyDeleteadd this to your <a> code:
target="_blank"
So, for example, a link to Google might look like this:
<a href="http://www.google.com/" target="_blank">Google</a>
I always thought it was creepy that lonely housewives in my town wanted to f*ck me anyway.
ReplyDeleteI almost sh&t the first time I saw that.
Some of their bigger ads on the WaPo website also feature Chrissy Moran, another lovely adult film star. I'm glad you've written this, Rusty, because I've done a double take on more than one occasion when reading a Fareed Zakaria opinion piece or Jason LaCanfora's latest Redskins article. It's good to know that somebody else is as big a perv as I am.
ReplyDeleteI will look for her. Thank God I'm not the only one who noticed this.
ReplyDeleteBTW, my dad e-mailed me asking what "nsfw" meant and how I knew that these girls were porn stars. I look forward to Thanksgiving dinner.
You just tell him at least it wasn't gay porn.
ReplyDeleteHe should be happy.
And again, you must tell us all how you becamce intimately familiar with porn stars.
ReplyDeleteSeems like the only people who should be offended should also be ashamed of themselves. it's like bringing stolen property back to complain because it's broken.
"Ashamed" is a bit strong of a word.
ReplyDeleteYou don't think it's weird that The Washington Post features pictures of porn stars from what is certainly a less than reputable dating site?
Rusty
ReplyDeleteThey are only known as porn stars to degenerates who look at porn. regular people would have no idea.
Degenerates? You're telling me you haven't rubbed one out online?
ReplyDeleteIt would be irregular NOT to look at porn.
This is so stupid I can;t belive I'm commenting in response. Has to be a comment left just to get a rise out of people.
OHMIGOD, I KNOW! Seriously, porn stars are way awesomer than cancer.
ReplyDelete"They are only known as porn stars to degenerates who look at porn. regular people would have no idea."
ReplyDeleteIt's so mainstream now that I'm amused whenever anyone has a problem with it. It's a free country. I'm not embarassed. But I probably don't spend quite as much money as does Rusty. I mean, I just get the free stuff. I don't know all of their names in the big-budget films and I don't get any trade journals or anything.
I'm not THAT into it. Wow, Rusty.
Hey! Wait a second! I do not read trade journals or spend any $$$ on the industry. I watched a vh-1 special on it once.
ReplyDeleteRusty,
ReplyDeletehttp://www.worldsex.com
http://www.pinkworld.com
Wow, as I was going throught these posts, I just realized how old this post is. Mate 1 is still using the same pictures!
ReplyDeleteIf these were legit, I would think Sandy2568 would at least change her age to 25 by now!
I've also noticed similar tactics on Yahoo Ad's that look up your IP and use the location to lure you in. I nearly fell for one of these that was supposedly from a local man who had lost his job due to the economy, but found easy income using a "Free" Google Ad toolkit. He encouraged people to order their own free kit just pay the $1.95 shipping fee. I almost bit. I started fill out the info, but for I gave my credit card info,decided to read the hidden terms, 1.) The Toolkit was not from google, but a third party company, and once you authorize them to bill the $1.95, they will automatically start sending you monthly information packages for over $70 per month, until you cancel. (Good luck with that)
I never hear of the pornstar, you must be a perv! LOL!
ReplyDelete(Free Porn)