A VC« Data Portability | Main | The New Hall of Fame »
The Crunchman
The WSJ is the last one to know, of course, that Mike Arrington (the Crunchman) is the man of the hour in Silicon Valley and the Internet business. They featured him today in a story that will tell you nothing you don't already know. You have to have a subscription to read it but here's the link in case you do.
It's been popular to bash Arrington lately and I even did that a bit with my "Flaky" post last week.
But I want to say some things about the Crunchman. First, he is one of those people, like Peter Rojas, Om Malik, Arianna Huffington, the Boing Boing crew, that has taken the blog format and made it his/her own. He has shown the world why blogging is a superior form of media.
Second, he doesn't buy into tired notions like "conflicts of interests". As John Doerr said a long time ago, "no conflict no interest". My partner's nephew says he likes sports blogs better than the sports sections of newspapers because blogs don't pretend to be "objective". His nephew's quote was something like "everyone has his or her version of the truth, at least with bloggers you know where they are coming from". And so it is with Arrington. Don't for a second think that Mike is "objective" or "fair". He's not and he's never claimed to be. I hope nobody thinks I am objective or fair either. I've got a business, a portfolio, my political views, and I express them without the intent of objectivity every day on this blog. That is what blogs are all about. People driven media, opinions, reality.
People will say, yeah but Fred you are part of that club too. You get unfair access. So what. That's life. If you don't like it, start a blog, get an audience, blog at 4am in the morning, and get into the club yourself.
Don't take this to mean that I am a disciple of Techcrunch. I read it once a week or so. I probably miss 75% of the posts on Techcrunch. I don't get excited when a company gets a Techcrunch bounce. And my goal is to know the companies long before they get written about on Techcrunch. The VCs who show up on entrepreneur's doors after the Techcrunch post are going to get hurt with that approach.
But I like the Crunchman. I respect him. And I think he's doing a great service to the blog world, the Internet business world, Silicon Valley, and himself. I am rooting for you to beat CNET Mike.
BTW - I ganked this photo from the WSJ in case you didn't know that already. That's the reason for the linkback, even though its to a page behind a wall.
Comments (14) | Posted November 3, 2006 in Venture Capital and Technology
Comments
Fred 11/3/06: Don't take this to mean that I am a disciple of Techcrunch. I read it once a week or so. I probably miss 75% of the posts on Techcrunch.
Versus
Fred 10/27/06: Michael is one of the best bloggers ever and I read Techcrunch every day.
Posted by: Eric | Nov 3, 2006 7:52:17 AM
good catch Eric.
the truth is probably somewhere in between.
but the whole point of my post is that my blog is not the "truth" just my truth such as it is.
Posted by: fred | Nov 3, 2006 8:42:54 AM
TechCrunch is clearly doing a lot to move the blogging world forward. I'm glad to see they are getting the press.
They've nailed "Content is King." I found several new sites and quality bloggers through them, which I believe includes coming across your site via MyBlogLog.
It will be interesting to see if they have staying power. Few sites seem to stay on top very long. Thanks for the post.
Posted by: eoecho | Greg Magnus | Nov 3, 2006 9:39:51 AM
The Arrington piece was part of WSJ's free features and can be found here:
http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB116244521605611149-xEEW_Dh1mMLLs0dtYRdw492SQYE_20061109.html?mod=blogs
Posted by: greg | Nov 3, 2006 9:44:57 AM
Let's try that WSJ link again...
http://snipurl.com/114qa
Posted by: greg | Nov 3, 2006 9:46:39 AM
if striving to be "objective" and "fair" isn't essential -- and I'm with you; i dont de facto recoil from a blurring of emotion, editorial and reportage -- then do you also applaud...?
Fox News
Bill O'Reilly
Rush Limbaugh
I do, just as I applaud
Jon Stewart
Bill Maher
Al Franken
If we can all agree that journalism, politics and media are -- like the human beings behind them -- messy and sometimes raw, then maybe just maybe we can move back from the now painful, poisonous red/blue antagonism and acrimony, and return to core democracy-capitalism concepts like respecting our adversaries' honorable intentions (even if we loath their actions) and that people who disagree with us aren't "cowards" or "liars" or "evil" or "idiots" but actually are *us* -- just acting with honor and duty as a "loyal opposition".
Posted by: steve | Nov 3, 2006 9:51:58 AM
some good points steve
Posted by: howard Lindzon | Nov 3, 2006 9:59:44 AM
I agree that there's a place for passion and opinion, but the problem is when it gets to the point that we all have our own "facts." So a Rush Limbaugh is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts and that gets lost when we all say, 'yeah, The New York Times is biased, they just try to prentend they're not.' There's something to be said for striving for objectivity, even if you don't always reach it.
Posted by: greg | Nov 3, 2006 10:05:29 AM
I used to (maybe a year ago) read Techcrunch all the time. Now it doesn't grab me so much, even though I see all the headlines in my feedreader. I think a year ago when I did read it alot it was one of the places that had more insight / news on Web 2.0 stuff. Now that web 2.0 is not so fresh plus lots of coverage on it elsewhere, it seems like its lost some of the breaking news aspect.
I think today's article may be an early sign of a top for TC.
Posted by: Bill Davenport | Nov 3, 2006 10:07:29 AM
surely the irony of your last sentence sais it all. An article about a person who is exploding media can be found behind the wall that he is busy breaking down.
So what if there is bias - if someone feels that strongly then dont read it.
Posted by: mark slater | Nov 3, 2006 12:55:47 PM
good read !
Posted by: ouriel | Nov 3, 2006 12:56:44 PM
Peer-to-Peer Angel Funding = Prosper.com for business models
Posted by: Alex | Nov 3, 2006 3:05:32 PM
Interesting take on the article. It is interesting to hear how others see the techcrunch thing.
I find it very interesting how a guy like Mike is able to outscoop the like of major news chains on the deals that happen in the valley and across the 'web2' landscape.
I am sure that the WSJ cringed as did other media outlets when they had to quote a blog on a major news item like Google buying YouTube.
I think that he and guys like OM are creating great things and i think we will see more specialized blogs grabbing the reins from traditional media.
cheers
scott
Posted by: scott brooks | Nov 3, 2006 3:22:17 PM
I think techcrunch is meaningless in the grand scheme of things. Don't get me wrong, there is a value here but TC is just another content resource for a web2/boom internet economy. Once we see a little letup, so will the traffic fall. Who here remembers FuckedCompany.com and how popular it once was? FC wasn't a blog, it was much simpler, TC is a blog and essentially is the equivalent of a startup magazine...I reccomend reading up on Tony Perkins, AlwaysON Network plans to see where this could be headed...TC is at the heart of a trend but i think will become just another also-ran once the buzz has died down a bit...
Posted by: Richie Hecker | Nov 3, 2006 7:43:38 PM
Main RSS Feed of All Posts
VC and Technology Posts Only
