Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence • Hacker News Board

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#61

Post by RickHull » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 8:30 PM UTC

The page loaded completely empty for me, even after enabling every prompted script domain via NoScript. Curious, I checked the source, and it looks like the page essentially consists of script elements within an unclosed head tag:

http://pastebin.com/JkVyL9tb

sigh...

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#62

Post by kr1shna » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 8:32 PM UTC

It's the law of cycles. Techcrunch has had a good run, but in the internet era, a fast paced blog can't last forever. See the downhill progress of Engadget and Gizmodo. Time to make room for a new king of the hill.

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#63

Post by gscott » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 8:32 PM UTC

Zakuzaa wrote: post #3

I'd like to see mass exodus of writers and creating their own brand new site. Sounds familiar.

They could be funded by Crunchfund

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#64

Post by kr1shna » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 8:33 PM UTC

chugger wrote: post #15

wait for ThisIsMyNextCrunch to launch in the next few months.

I've previously suggested that MG and some of the crew should go join the upcoming Verge

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#65

Post by cheald » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 8:38 PM UTC

RickHull wrote: post #61

The page loaded completely empty for me, even after enabling every prompted script domain via NoScript. Curious, I checked the source, and it looks like the page essentially consists of script elements within an unclosed head tag: http://pastebin.com/JkVyL9tb sigh...

That would likely be PHP throwing a fatal error and bailing out.

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#66

Post by [deleted] » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 9:03 PM UTC

credo wrote: post #41

Arrington frames it as a matter of "editorial independence" and doesn't talk about ethics and conflict of interests. However, I don't see how anyone else (and least of all, the owners of TechCrunch) can ignore those two matters - and the resultant impact on the credibility of TechCrunch. Ultimately, Arrington made a conscious decision to sell TechCrunch to AOL. He made another conscious decision to become the founder…

[deleted]

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#67

Post by pollster » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 9:08 PM UTC

At first this came off to me as link bait and Arrington being a drama queen. But, surely these types of disagreements go on within every company and blogging about them is the ultimate in transparency as well as a chance for others to learn from TechCrunch. It may be reality blogging, but it's the reality of an extremely successful organization and leader, and that's something we can probably all learn from.

poll - Do you think TechCrunch should have editorial independence? http://www.wepolls.com/p/2301501

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#68

Post by zbruhnke » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 9:08 PM UTC

I think Arrington for got Option 3:

AOL says F* You Arrington, does what they want since they bought tech crunch and they own it. The past shareholders have no ability to recall the buyout almost a year later and say nevermind we want our company back.

Reality is Arrington sold, Arrington started a new fund. People think this new fund will interfere with Arrington's "Editorial Independence" therefore they claim he will be gone.

At the end of the day it just does not matter that much, If Mike is who he thinks he is he could just go start another blog tomorrow and gain all the traction he wanted. His non-compete (if applicable) is probably non-enforceable after the first twelve months anyhow.

If he is not then he should just go back to his new fund and invest in some startups loudly (which is the Arrington fashion) which is probably what he will do best

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#69

Post by mikeleeorg » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 9:19 PM UTC

John Gruber wins for the best tl;dr I've seen of this drama yet:

> "I Sold My Company (to a Bunch of Idiots) and Expected to Still Maintain Control Over It."

http://daringfireball.net/linked/2011/09/06/aol-techcrunch

Re: Michael Arrington: Editorial Independence

#70

Post by movingahead » Tue, Sep 06, 2011, 9:25 PM UTC

Most of the editors at Engadget, another tech blog owned by AOL have left publicly citing AOL's editorial policy. I am surprised by the lack of support that Hacker News community is showing to Arrington. Even in the post announcing the sale to AOL, there was clear stress about the editorial independence of TC. Arrington always has had a weird investment policy, but to his credit, he has maintained a strict transparency about his posts. For people who are alleging what happens to those companies which are competitors, won't the same logic apply to Fred Wilson or Om Malik, both of whom are VCs as well as popular bloggers.

I do think Arrington should not have named his fund CrunchFund. Techcrunch runs a database about companies and people involved in the tech industry called Crunchbase. This brings us to a different question. Michael earlier had a plan for a tablet called CrunchPad, which didn't materialize when he had a fall-out with his technical partner. Does the brand name belong to the company or to the founder ? No matter who owns the trademark and other legal stuff, I believe it should stay with the company.