DISQUS

Eric Berlin I think the "too much going on" thing often has to do with too many ads (wrote a story a few months ago about how Mashable is overloaded with ad-clutter) or unnecessary widgets.

The aesthetics of design are of course endlessly subjective and this is simply one online media cultist's opinion. About a return to minimalism: I have noticed some tech blogs trending this way, come to think about it. I find Mathew Ingram's site to be quite a bit more stark/minimalist than it used to be for instance.

Anyway, the design of blogs is in some ways like naming websites/products. It doesn't matter but it does matter but...

loicdirect@gmail.com At august capital, not a party? Ah, question of vocabulary :)

StevenHodson You obviously haven't been paying attention to the push that your entertainment industry has been making against our Government to make the ruling party change the laws that have been working for us over to ones just like yours in the States. So BitTorrent may soon not be an option for us anymore either.

Duncan Riley you were wrong in retrospect. Twitter own dodgy uptime numbers (they are seriously claiming 97% this month) even prove it, performance has gotten worse since Cook left, the buck didn't stop with him.

Sam Great comment Michael.

I would love to see feedback on which was more valuable although I don't think you can separate "better" and "popular" from potential and value. In analyzing the relative value of these two offerings it is important to remember they are both media companies. The comments in this thread illustrate the popularity of both offerings and also how different people prefer to consume media. One of the difficulties in forming a view on the relative value is the lack of/limited information available. At the moment i see a trade-off between audience and economics. Full disclosure: I do not fully understand the underlying cost structure of either company. Based on the chart above Techcrunch have a materially larger audience but intuitively i see the economics of an aggregation service such as Techmeme as more compelling. However as with any valuation it is all about the future potential.

Is there an element of Google v Mahalo here? If not I think there is potential for a similar issue to arise in the future.

Irrespective of your view of Michael and Techcrunch you have to appreciate how they front up with a view, break news and participate in the subsequent discussion.

Michael's participation in this thread illustrates Fred's view "The comments here at avc are the best thing about this blog".

Finally I completely agree with Chartreuse's comment.

Robert Seidman While I read TechCrunch regularly and perhaps even more frequently than TechMeme, I'd rather "OWN" TechMeme. It is real technology and it scales over multiple topics. It's hard to increase the "utility" of TechCrunch, while it wouldn't be hard for Gabe to increase utility by creating a Meme just for NFL Football.

I loves me some WeSmirch.com! Thank you, Gabe!

StevenHodson all are equal under the Law of the Cranky :)

dave Interesting comment. Surprisingly unhostile. :-)

Don Jones I wasn't trying to get your attention or angle for a TC write-up...just participating in the debate at face value. With VentureDeal, I'm interested in the veracity and quality of information, disclosing sources and the reputation of those sources among other things, so Fred's post caused me to spend more time on it.

I'm watching your CrunchBase efforts with some interest. The same issues of trust, curation and sources of information apply to your efforts to create an "open" database...

James Good point...a whole nother world you guys are in. ;)

mathewi I guess you're just a glutton for punishment, Mike :-)

Harold Right, because the comments section of TechCrunch is a real bastion of intellectual discourse.

Harold It just shows that one of the major strengths of mainstream media is not the actual journalists, but the infrastructure around them. Without an editor or even a newsroom, you don't have the ability to show something to someone and say "does this make sense", or "anyone got any good info on this competitor to the firm I'm writing about"?

Journalism and blogging have their strengths and weaknesses, but to pretend that just because it's the same guy it's the same thing is disingenuous.

ianbetteridge Yes Mike, I did. I don't think that Fred's criticism was totally correct. However, the way to respond to to it isn't for you to lash out - it's for you (or better yet, the journalists involved) to talk about why they thought their story stands. All I'm seeing from you is claims that Fred "crossed the line" (what line?) and claims that he's just biased.

Join the conversation, Mike - stop trying to shout people down.

fredwilson Mike

You are wrong about my intentions.

I wanted to make a point and picked two posts that got my attention

They got my attention because I had a connection to them

fred

Don Jones Here's a few thoughts, in no particular order:

One issue here that Fred's post highlights is the perceived "slant" or emphasis of the two articles in question (which I read before Fred's post) as a result of the data presented. This is a grey area, because of the sources and uses of data, and because of the perception of slant, where different persons may view it differently.

That Fred is biased and defends his portfolio companies or his friend's company is obvious to anyone who reads his blog, or at least no less obvious than on TC, with your (and your writers') numerous non-arms-length relationships with the companies you cover or their competitors, as well as your many past statements to that effect. Writing provocative opinion posts to generate heat isn't just limited to Fred, nor is it limited to TC...

I'm not a journalist, though I am a regular blogger and it's not the end of the world if I'm corrected on something. My favorite saying is "We're here to learn", and probloggers or MSM types get things wrong all the time. Writing well-researched work on an almost daily deadline must be hard work, but the slant is bound to go wrong sometimes, and it is proper for there to be pushback on a regular basis.

There's a reason for fact checkers and editorial review at MSM outlets - they want to get it right as much as possible. Are there fact checkers and editorial review before the stories get posted on TC? What is your internal quality control? Have you ever posted how your operation deals with issues of fact and slant? Or is it every writer for himself?

Just saying that some of your writers come from MSM backgrounds doesn't cut it. People get busy, deadlines beckon, the rent needs to be paid, stories need to be filed, and standards fall. TC is one of the more visible online blogs, and I for one would like to see you support a conference or whatever to shine the light on journalistic standards for the challenges of daily reporting in the business blogging world.

Maybe TC has come a long way from the days when you reported things like PBWiki getting acquired by Yahoo (not!), but daily business blogging has a long way to go still...

I think Fred apologized for singling out the two writers, but stood by his analysis.

Don Jones To challenge what a journalist writes doesn't hurt his reputation, only the facts that create doubt about what he writes. If his reportage is well-researched and conclusions based on that accurate research are sound, then there isn't anything that can hurt their reputation.

Fred or anyone else is well within their prerogative to question what a blogger or journalist writes. You are exhibiting typical media indignation over being challenged.

Just as your writers have the freedom to write what they choose, so we will have the freedom to challenge it.

Where's your response to the facts and questions raised?

fredwilson Well I'll take the blame for that. I'm sorry. But maybe they hurt the
reputation of two fine companies with their posts too.

We all have responsibilities don't we

fred

Jeff Clavier I swear, I had nothing to do with it. Besides seed funding Social Media, but it is all unrelated. Nick, please tell Mike I had nothing to do with you moving to one of my portfolio cos :).

Scott Raymond Michael:

I think the folks that are demanding your head are overreacting, and out of line. That being said, I also think that defending what the Gizmodo folks did shows a lack of sympathy for the folks this affected.

Don't get me wrong; I think the idea was pretty amusing. I do, however, think that the choice of venue and the victimization of hard-working folks was out of line. Demoing at CES is expensive. If it hadn't been discovered that this was a Gizmodo prank, it would have cost people their jobs and cost companies a lot of business. I wouldn't want to do business with a company that didn't appear to have their act together. Just because there was no lasting damage doesn't mean there couldn't have been - and doesn't mean there won't be the next time someone wants to pull a prank like this.

And actually, there HAS been damaging fallout from this. The reputation of bloggers as serious journalists has been set back due to a juvenile prank. It remains to be seen how this will play out. I dare say that serious news bloggers may find themselves shut out in the near future.

mathewi Welcome to the Internets, Mike :-)