Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

news.ycombinator.com

1–10 of 29 posts

Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

#1
So TechCrunch has been pretty transparent about this, which is admirable - and as other threads here and there have noted, it was quite clear who the offending intern was. He has since penned an apology http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1103069

But, in addition to 'An Appology To Our Readers' should TechCrunch reveal who got their play for pay? As dannyr noted 'It takes 2 to tango. If the intern was punished, the company that bribed him should also be punished.'

Edit - Here is another angle: http://siliconangle.com/blog/2010/02/05/was-deleting-all-daniel-brusilovsky’s-posts-an-ftc-blogger-guideline-violation-bruhaha/

Re: Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

#3
post #2

Did the company do anything wrong really though?

I would say a definite yes. They did wrong. Having worked for many years in the Middle East where this sort of thing is endemic, I would say in most cases it is the Company's corrupt policies that take advantages of people's weaknesses to achieve their own goals. Pretty much like the KGB coercing someone to spy for them in the old days, because he was in need of money or had a weak character. Both parties are wrong.

Re: Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

#6
I think this is much more common than you might expect. I don't like the idea of asking for compensation for a favorable mention, however is it all that different from when a company gives away their wares to someone unsolicited? I suspect that most people in that position will have their opinion slightly altered by the act of getting stuff for free. Many bloggers get stuff sent to them by various companies, some keep the items, others give it away to the readers.

So is asking to keep the item, or asking for an item all that much different? I guess its more overt from the author that they are after something, but if the author still maintains an objective viewpoint what harm is really done?

Can you really trust the product opinion of someone who hasn't put out their hard earned cash to acquire it? Amazon reviews in my eyes are much more powerful than something like Consumer Reports. What about you?

Re: Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

#9
post #2

Did the company do anything wrong really though?

Yes, not because they offered the gift but because they offered it knowing that it was against TC's policy. Providing the company's name would help ensure other companies think hard about bribing TC writers.

Right now the TC writer has been punished, rightfully so, but the company has gotten away with it.

Or are we to assume that any company he wrote about may have provided the bribe?

Re: Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

#10
post #6

I think this is much more common than you might expect. I don't like the idea of asking for compensation for a favorable mention, however is it all that different from when a company gives away their wares to someone unsolicited? I suspect that most people in that position will have their opinion slightly altered by the act of getting stuff for free. Many bloggers get stuff sent to them by various companies, some kee…

Consumer Reports has no advertising and they buy everything they review. When possible, they test items in blind trials. The magazine is also published by a non-profit. On the other hand, Amazon reviews have been gamed by both consumers and companies (two examples: Spore, Belkin). You can't be sure the people writing reviews actually bought the products they are reviewing. In my eyes Amazon reviews are better than nothing, but they don't come close to the value of a review by an unbiased party like Consumer Reports.
Post reply on HN