Below is a comment response I made to Anthony Citrano’s recent blog post, Gauging TechCrunch’s Moral Fiber In One Sentence. In my opinion, this is the gist of the article, “Last night, Arrington publicly feigned moral contemplation about an ‘ethical line’ he didn’t want to cross, then closed the same article with ‘more posts coming soon.’ Bring me the vomit bag.” This is my response:
I think this is the sort of thing that is going to drive the conversation off the blogs and back into the “ethical” embrace of the unholy priesthood of journalism. At least proper mainstream outlets can honor an embargo.
PR firms and publicists will respond, over time, with once bitten, twice shy when it comes to relating to the type of A-list blogs like TechCrunch, platforms that have, rightfully, the same sort of influence as newspapers and other media outlets but are under no restriction in terms of how they handle news: they’re bloggers, they’re blogs, they’re subjective, and they’re proud.
This isn’t about blogs, this is about terms of engagement and this is about trust. Hell, some of my best friends are reporters and some of these embargoes are rushed out of error, but in a newsroom, if you break an embargo, you get in a lot of trouble and you could be fired.
This all boils down to the web of trust: as long as getting on TechCrunch remains as important and essential for the tech community, Arrungton can — and will — do anything he bloody wants, no matter how much of an ethical deficit it projects.
That said, do you think Twitter will ever engage with TechCrunch after this? Well, I don’t mean to be cynical, but I think so.
I think this is all Kabuki theater. I think people in Silicon Valley love the attention and love the hype.
Besides, whenever my firm gets some column inches on TechCrunch or ValleyWag for our clients, our clients think the sun rises and sets on us and the client gets attention from Tech blogs and sites from around the world.
Michael Arrington’s influence is real. His power is palpable. I am sure bulbs light up in his fingers even before he screws them into lamps. I am sure he needs to use hair gel for fear that his electricity will show when his hair stands on end.
Until that ends, he — and his properties — can do whatever he wants with impunity in much the same way that Rush and Beck can on the radio.
What do you think? What is your opinion. Please pop them both here as well as over on Anthony’s awesome site.
![Reblog this post [with Zemanta]](http://img.zemanta.com/reblog_e.png?x-id=91398ce7-f257-4d39-8602-6505270df38e "Michael Arrington has real power and influence")
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
To tell you the truth, I do read everything on techcrunch. However, I find it very bias. And the ethical deficit is always in my mind, and I find it troublesome. No profession allows you to go beyond the boundaries of ethics when performing your job/duties. It is just not respectful to your colleagues and readers.
Therefore, unfortunately, I cannot be open minded to his perspective. However, I know the information he presents is accurate and current.
Wow, Yankee, what a dilemma!