TechCrunch Intern Admits To Asking For Compensation For Writing Posts

Exclusivity is apparently worth an embargo.

http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/23/the-last-has-fallen-the...

As the old saying goes, after that we're just dickering about the price.

Really? This is what happens when you pay interns with awesome experience, rather than cash?

There are two sides to this story.

Let me ask this question, because it seems it needs asking:

1) has anybody here ever been approached by other 'writers' who will do a write-up in exchange for goodies ?

2) has anybody here been approached by writers to post links under their HN username ?

The second has definitely happened to me, the first was so oblique that it might be my misunderstanding. But I'm fairly surprised, what's your call, should I out the publication ? The person doing the canvassing ?

I've been wondering about what to do with this.

As for the way this 'kid' (I'm putting that in quotes because if you are smart enough to ask for computers worth quite a bit of money you are smart enough to understand there are consequences if you get caught) has behaved, the other side to that story is those companies that did not get written about because they refused to play ball.

We're not talking about an accident or an oversight here, but at a deliberate attempt at fraud, and not a one-off but part of a pattern.

I don't see even being fired and having to return the goods to his employer who will presumably re-imburse the people that 'paid' for it is a punishment, that leaves him at '0'.

TC is handling this as good as they can after the fact, but before you give someone access to the editorial process don't you at least read them the riot act as to what the consequences will be if they do something like this?

Just like the 'real' newspapers companies like TC wield some power and it is important to make sure that everybody that is in on the process knows exactly where the line is.

If TC did make it clear in advance what is permissible I'm sympathetic to naming the guy, if not then probably not.

The key bit in Mikes post is this:

> on at least one other occasion

So, how often did that happen ? Once ? Twice ? More ??

If more then outing the guy looks reasonable, if it is once or twice then again, probably not.

I'm sympathetic with vaksels gut reaction, but slow down a bit and let's get some more data before making that call.

TC has their opinion, that's fine, we're all adults and reasonably smart cookies here, I'd like to be able to trust what I read is not coloured in any way and what Mike is doing is as much damage control on behalf of TC as it is an exercise in ethics after the fact.

Let's hear him out on how he has posted guidelines about how his writers should behave.

No policy -> TC bad, no matter how they spin it now, Yes policy -> kid gets outed, but only if this happened more than the 2 times that we're sure about.

I think that's fairly reasonable.

You're claiming it's worth in the neighborhood of $500. If it's actually only worth $5 that's a big difference. No reasonable person believes TC can be bought for $5.

My guess is that exclusivity is more of an ego thing than anything else. Competitive people like to win, and in journalism that means scooping the competition. TC might make just as much money, with or without an exclusive (give or take a few dollars). If true, all you're doing by giving an exclusive is feeding their ego. That's hardly the same as handing over a $2k laptop.

I have to ask, how is this any different from TechCrunch writing glowing posts about companies that spend many thousands of dollars per month on advertising? Or singing the praises of the lame startups that pay thousands of dollars to annoy people in the "Demo Pit" of TechCrunch 50?

TechCrunch isn't a newspaper, it's a blog, and an overly sensational one at that.