Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

quibb.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–26 of 26 posts

Re: How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

#21

Post by benologist »

TC is going to get worse, not better. AOL hasn't even gone full retard with them yet, this is all we can expect...

Tags: android, android 4.0, android 4.0.4, Android4.0, Android4.0.4, droid razr, droid razr hd, droid razr maxx hd, DroidRazr, DroidRazrHd, DroidRazrMaxxHd, google, Ice Cream Sandwich, IceCreamSandwich, ics, mobilepostcross, motorola, motorola droid razr, motorola droid razr hd, motorola droid razr maxx, motorola droid razr maxx hd, MotorolaDroidRazr, MotorolaDroidRazrHd, MotorolaDroidRazrMaxx, MotorolaDroidRazrMaxxHd, review, verizon, video

Pure Garbage, puregarbage, pure, garbage.

Re: How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

#22

Post by chipotle_coyote »

The article seems to suggest that the best way for TC to be relevant is to post shorter bits and long form articles written by entrepreneurs. I believe what's being described exists as "PandoDaily," which statistically speaking, you are probably not reading.

Yes, it's true that most technology writers haven't gone out to try their hand at founding startups. Most founders also haven't tried their hand at technology journalism, and it's hard not to notice that guests posts on blogs from founders are usually vapid cheerleading of the form "there is an unaddressed market problem in field X and there is a lot of opportunity in solving X," where "X" is whatever field their startup is in.

There are founders who are good writers, and people who write regularly will get better at it. But there are also a fair number of journalists, particularly in "new media" like, uh, websites, who have enough of a technical background to have some idea what they're talking about when they write. Is it better to have articles written by solid writers with unexceptional technology backgrounds, or articles written by people who've successfully gotten money but aren't necessarily good writers (and might still have unexceptional technology backgrounds)? Personally, I'd rather go for the former.

Re: How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

#23

Post by richardjordan »

No mention of the number one issue. Stop writing about themselves. They think they're the story half the time. Inside nods and winks. Crap back and forth between writers. Petty little vendettas with other writers/institutions/organizations/whatever ...it's pathetic and childish.

Shifting to Facebook comments shows they care more about the (in the long run questionable) benefit of Facebook sharing, over quality of discourse. Once upon a time the comments section of TC posts could be as good as the article. Now it's spam, trolls, and "Johnny this is your mom, why don't you call me?".

Re: How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

#24

Post by wisty »

richardjordan wrote: post #23

No mention of the number one issue. Stop writing about themselves. They think they're the story half the time. Inside nods and winks. Crap back and forth between writers. Petty little vendettas with other writers/institutions/organizations/whatever ...it's pathetic and childish. Shifting to Facebook comments shows they care more about the (in the long run questionable) benefit of Facebook sharing, over quality of dis…

It worked when Michael Arrington was there, because he was a bit of a celebrity himself. Lots of people loved him, or at least loved to hate him. Maybe that was just in the tail end of his time there, when he had established himself as a celebrity by writing lots of controversial stuff, getting publicly slammed for it, then firing back. But you can't leave out the first step - writing an initial article which genuinely stirs things up a bit.

Re: How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

#25

Post by kmfrk »

flyinglizard wrote: post #7

TechCrunch has nothing to do with journalism. It's a startup tabloid. There's nothing wrong in this and clearly there is a strong demand for that among readers. If you want in-depth, read Ars or Wired or Inc. For tech trash? TC.

TechCrunch is definitely not a journalistic paragon[1], but I think the term tabloid is misplaced. Valleywag was the definition of a startup tabloid back in the days.

[1]: http://www.realdanlyons.com/blog/2012/02/13/hit-men-click-wh...

Re: How TechCrunch must change to stay relevant to the startup community

#26

Post by richardjordan »

wisty wrote: post #24
richardjordan wrote: post #23

No mention of the number one issue. Stop writing about themselves. They think they're the story half the time. Inside nods and winks. Crap back and forth between writers. Petty little vendettas with other writers/institutions/organizations/whatever ...it's pathetic and childish. Shifting to Facebook comments shows they care more about the (in the long run questionable) benefit of Facebook sharing, over quality of dis…

It worked when Michael Arrington was there, because he was a bit of a celebrity himself. Lots of people loved him, or at least loved to hate him. Maybe that was just in the tail end of his time there, when he had established himself as a celebrity by writing lots of controversial stuff, getting publicly slammed for it, then firing back. But you can't leave out the first step - writing an initial article which genuine…

It also helped that Arrington was a brilliant writer with a real nose for a tech story.
Post reply on HN