

TechCrunch Intern Admits To Asking For Compensation For Writing Posts - kloncks
http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/02/04/an-apology-to-our-readers/

======
patio11
In the full knowledge that this opinion will be unpopular: the crime here is
not selling coverage. The crime here is selling coverage obviously while being
an intern. The media, including Techcrunch, sells coverage as a matter of
routine.

Sure, we'd be happy to cover your new gadget, but we'll need an exclusive on
that. The exclusive will be worth, at the margin, 50,000 uniques we won't lose
to Endgadget (and the attendant link equity we'll get for being first, and
possibly mainstream media attention). The CPM for this blog is $10. But $500
in an envelope on the table, that is _totally different_. That makes us _feel_
like we're selling coverage.

~~~
pg
The difference is that an exclusive actually does have more news value. By
definition, it's news.

~~~
patio11
If Bob Smith creates a tablet computer which runs Flash and cures cancer
tomorrow, that has some news value N1 and some pageview value P1. If a
particular media outlet gets an exclusive on that announcement, then it has
news value N2 and pageview value P2. delta(N1, N2) is zero -- it is still news
tomorrow no matter how many people report it. (See: iPad, which was apparently
a story of staggering importance despite having everybody and their dog say
the same things about it.)

delta(P1, P2) is nonzero. Hilariously nonzero. If Steve Jobs had a fit of
stupid and had given somebody the exclusive for the iPad, that would probably
have been worth hundreds of millions of page views. Page views are, of course,
exchangable for money. We build entire _industries_ on that fact.

News media outlets are willing to trade things of value for exclusives. For
example, PR flacks value embargoes. TechCrunch will give you one if, and only
if, you give them an exclusive, despite their professed hatred for them in all
other contexts. That should imply to you that TechCrunch is getting something
from the exclusive -- and it isn't delta(N).

~~~
pg
The difference between being paid to cover something and covering something in
return for an exclusive is that in the latter case your readers benefit as
well.

Even if your only criterion in deciding what to print was how newsworthy it
was, you'd still be more likely to print a story if you'd been given an
exclusive.

~~~
chairface
How does a reader benefit from news that is available from fewer sources?

Also, if you're more likely to print a story when given an exclusive, then
newsworthiness is not your only criterion in deciding what to print.

~~~
pg
If _The Economist_ gets an exclusive that _Time_ doesn't, then _The Economist_
's readers have information that _Time_ readers don't.

Did I really need to explain that? This reminds me of the thread a few days
ago when I had to explain that it was not necessarily meaningless to talk
about something that would have happened.

This is why I need to get rid of points on comments. 11 points on a comment
makes it into something that demands an answer. Without points it would just
have to stand on its own merits.

(Your second sentence is simply false. The newsworthiness of a story isn't
constant; it's higher the first time the story is published. E.g. that Steve
Jobs had a liver transplant has near zero newsworthiness now, but it was big
news when the story first broke. And if someone gives you an exclusive on a
story, then you're assured that it will be breaking news when you publish it,
with the attendant increment in newsworthiness.)

~~~
chairface
My problem with your conjecture is that exclusives create an artificial
scarcity of information, which I don't count as real value creation. Further,
for the general reader, there is the added cost of having to subscribe, or at
the very least check, more news sources to get the same amount of information
as you would in a world without exclusives. There is also the delay before
other publications start picking up the story and we get competing points of
view. To me as a consumer, it looks like an overall decrease in value. I
understand that it doesn't look that way to a publisher.

About my second sentence - I was imagining a story with little newsworthiness,
as this is one extreme of your "only criteria". If a publisher is more likely
to publish this story because of an exclusive, which is what you seem to be
saying, then newsworthiness isn't the only criteria.

I did not mean to be combative or demand an answer from you - my apologies if
I came off that way. I just don't agree with or don't understand your point of
view, and said so. Apparently 10 other people thought that it stands on its
own merits well enough to deserve an upvote. If you don't agree, that's fine,
but the snark is uncalled for. If you don't think a post is worthy of a reply,
then don't.

------
kloncks
To be very fair, I love how honest and forthcoming Mike was with this news.
That was hard and he could have covered it up. To all the deniers and Mike-
haters out there, I think this only goes to show the type of person he is.

Also, I love how the identity of the intern wasn't disclosed. Not only does it
allow him to make amends and learn from his mistakes, it also shows the level
of professionalism that stems from TechCrunch.

~~~
vaksel
screw that, unethical behavior like this needs to be exposed...if Mike won't
say who it is, I will:

if you want to know who it is go here:

<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=1102828>

~~~
astrec
(Some) Stupid stuff I did as a 17 year old:

-> Deleted /var on a production system I had no right touching at a Fortune 500.

-> Drove my dad's car into a fence. Unlicensed.

-> Stole the street sign for Cobain St.

-> Plagiarised a philosophy essay (Hegel).

-> etc. etc. etc.

Seventeen year old kids mess up. Seventeen year old kids grow up.

Go easy tiger.

~~~
jacquesm
> -> Deleted /var on a production system I had no right touching at a Fortune
> 500.

The 'you had no right touching' bit should have been 'you should have no
possibility to touch'.

Whoever administered that systems shares part of the blame, you have done it,
but they should have never let you get within spitting distance of a terminal
capable of doing that.

~~~
astrec
Too right. Production root passwords had a planetary theme - where planetary
means one of the giants in our solar system - not hard for a nosey and curious
kid to take a peek at _any_ system they wanted.

------
mikeyur
This was a friend of mine, really feeling bad for him. One mistake and he's
paying for it. Fortunately it will eventually fade away.

Edit: <http://twitter.com/loic/status/8666998987> \- Loic gave some good
advice, I can't get ahold of him but hopefully he'll take it.

~~~
jacquesm
I'm all for that, and also for owning up completely as to how often this
happened.

TC yanking the content to avoid tainting is one thing but it would be good to
know what the extent of this is.

Another thing that bothers me about this is that I can't see how a 17 year old
given the keys to the kingdom would come up with such a scheme, that's hardly
the first thing that crosses your mind when you start your career.

If the first instance of this was initiated by the company written about then
that would change my whole idea about this.

~~~
joshfinnie
See, I have a different view on this. I am not faulting the intern at all, it
is really the company that wanted the write-up. If you are going to bribe
someone at TechCrunch, who do you contact: Mike A. or an intern?

I think the intern's response was a good start to what is going to be some
time before his reputation is back to normal, but I think we need to see who
this company was and blame fault there.

------
jmintz
Dan's apology: <http://www.danielbru.com/2010/02/the-line-was-crossed/>

I haven't ever met the guy, but much worse things are done by 17-year-olds all
the time. The punishment he is receiving seems adequate to me. Hopefully he
learns from it, this post is a good first step.

~~~
aresant
"In some way or another, a line was crossed that should have never been"

The "in some way or another" part I dont like, the rest is heartfelt.

But maybe there's another side of the story.

------
staunch
I was never this dumb about stuff like this, but I was just as dumb about
other stuff. I'd give him a second chance.

~~~
jacquesm
I'd fire his sorry ass and make him cough up the details about each and every
story he's written in the past, and I would have yanked those where there was
interference but I would have left the rest because those companies already
written about by this character do not need to be punished if they were in the
clear.

Don't do the crime if you can't do the time.

And I'd make very sure that every other member of the reporting staff realizes
their ass is grass in case of a repetition.

If it would have been once that would be one thing, but twice and possibly
more is definitely grounds for termination.

The only thing that put a stop to this is that Arrington was approached
directly by a person that he trusts, and the threat of someone scooping TC on
their sloppy ethics (as if that's news).

------
zaidf
Stupider(read: more damaging) things are done by 17 year old kids everyday.
Heck, I can't even share mine and at the time it happend I just wanted to lock
myself in a room. But it taught me a lesson that I pretty much apply a few
times everyday.

When the dust settles, pick yourself up and tell yourself "I'll never be that
stupid again". It's been a few yrs but I still tell myself that and it usually
does wonders in knocking some sense into yourself.

~~~
Psyonic
While I'm sure you're right that stupider things are done by 17 year old kids
everyday, the same thing could be said about 25 year olds...

------
jacquesm
Michael, your apology is meaningless without a very clear statement that you
have learned something too, and that is not evident from your post.

If TC has posted guidelines on how its editors should behave and this person
transgressed those guidelines then that's one thing.

But if TC does _NOT_ have posted guidelines it would be comforting to know
that those will be put in place after this incident, and that you will make
those guidelines public.

Your lesson is that you can't just give anybody access to the TC cms without
making sure they have their obligations and the consequences of transgressions
spelled out.

Transparency is not spilling the beans after the fact (that's just damage
control), it is making sure that the rules are known by all parties.

~~~
dreyfiz
You don't need posted guidelines to know that this behavior is wrong.

~~~
jacquesm
To _know_ not, but to not have such guidelines in place for your editorial
board/writers makes it vague what is allowed and what is not.

So that's why every professional organization spells it out explicitly.

Attempts to give items worth in excess of 'x' are to be reported to
management, all gifts beyond a ball-point pen or a base-ball cap are to be
refused.

That sort of thing.

Have read here: <http://www.nytco.com/press/ethics.html>

For how it is done in a _real_ news outlet.

------
dannyr
I know he must be protected in some way because he's not of legal age but I do
not agree with deleting all his posts.

The writer has written several blog posts about milestones of important
startups. I feel like I'm losing a sense of history here (though we can still
find it on other blogs, google cache, etc).

Here are some of his articles that do not exists anymore:

[http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/12/23/twitter-acquires-
mixer-...](http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/12/23/twitter-acquires-mixer-labs/)

[http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/01/26/square-angels-mayer-
cro...](http://www.techcrunch.com/2010/01/26/square-angels-mayer-crowley-
fannin/)

~~~
pavs
You feel like you are loosing a sense of history? Are you serious? Is TC your
ONLY news source?

~~~
dannyr
Despite it's notoriety and admit it or not, Techcrunch is still the most
influential tech blog since the start of the Web 2.0 era up to now.

------
dannyr
It takes 2 to tango. If the intern was punished, the company that bribed him
should also be punished.

~~~
boucher
Giving in to coercion is hardly call for punishment. If I were Techcrunch, I'd
reimburse the cost of whatever they paid.

~~~
nudist
Depends on the instigator, of course.

~~~
boucher
Indeed.

------
jakarta
Considering he is just 1 year shy of being an adult, I don't buy the 'kids
make mistakes' argument. The intern really must be devoid of ethics if he
wants to extort laptops out of start ups that are hoping for press. The fact
that it had also occurred one other time is more disturbing, it means that
this was not some momentary ethical lapse but a real attempt to receive
bribes.

I don't really understand how anyone can defend that kind of behavior here.
With any luck, his reputation will be ruined and no one will do business with
him again. He'll issue an apology - and why not, he has nothing to lose right?

From my experience, people with poor ethics tend to be serial offenders. There
was a kid at my high school that was caught doctoring his transcript in hopes
of getting into an ivy league school. He was caught and apologized. Earlier
this year, as a senior in college, he was caught again -- this time forging
e-mails from recruiters to create leverage for a better job opportunity on
Wall Street.

~~~
ugh
One year shy of being an adult? I've met 18 year olds and they are not adults.

Give him a break. And a second chance. Only call him a serial offender if he
actually is one. Do you really believe that he should be punished for life
("no one will do business with him again")? What a fucked up attitude is that?

~~~
jacquesm
Well, according to Arringtons post he already is a serial offender, at _least_
two instances, possibly more.

------
minouye
I'm reminded of the whole tiff between Arrington and Leo Laporte. Irony
anyone?

<http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/06/06/ouch/>

------
seldo
It's a shame to hear this about Dan; I'd read about him before this incident
in regards to his involvement with Teens in Tech. He's a very impressive
individual and hopefully this is just a minor incident of letting his success
get the better of him.

------
mronge
I want to add that he wrote a post about my company and product (Rocketbox,
<http://www.getrocketbox.com>), but ABSOLUTELY NO COMPENSATION CHANGED HANDS.
I would think that most of the companies he wrote about are in a similar
situation, where they did nothing wrong but their article has also been
deleted.

I hope he learns from this, and it kinda sucks my article is gone.

------
terpua
Here's a link to the now unreachable post: [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/02...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-
dyn/content/article/2010/02/05/AR2010020500146.html)

------
dbz
Why weren't the people/person(s) who gave him the _compensation_ fired as
well? They enabled him and are just as guilty in my opinion.

~~~
spicyj
I believe it was not TechCrunch staff who paid him - it was outside firms who
wanted to be promoted on a high-traffic technology blog.

~~~
kloncks
...how does this make sense? what outside firm was promoted on techcrunch
through this news breaking?

------
tlrobinson
<http://www.techcrunch.com/author/danielbru/>

vs.

[http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:x9DbW8_sb1sJ:www.techcru...](http://74.125.95.132/search?q=cache:x9DbW8_sb1sJ:www.techcrunch.com/author/danielbru/+http://www.techcrunch.com/author/danielbru/&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)

------
rjurney
He's 17. Think of the dumbest thing you did at 17. Now imagine it made
TechCrunch.

What a joke.

------
gte910h
[http://www.hhs.gov/opa/familylife/annualconfabstracts/brain_...](http://www.hhs.gov/opa/familylife/annualconfabstracts/brain_dvt_white_paper.pdf)

Folks, he's 17. This is a 17 year olds type of mistake. His brain isn't fully
developed yet.

In a past era, it would have just been covered up.

~~~
lucifer
"In a past era" a 17 year old male would have been a married man with children
and serious social responsibilities.

~~~
gte910h
And his brain still would have not been developed.

And the newspaper in question would have just covered up the mistakes.

------
pavs
Drama and TechCrunch goes hand in hand.

------
johnl87
This is what happens when you expect people to work for you for free.

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

~~~
johnl87
You're selling that as if it were so hard to get experience and get paid at
the same time. I know this won't be popular, but Microsoft pays interns more
than most people get paid hourly.

~~~
dannyr
Comparing Microsoft to Techcrunch? Have you looked at how much money each
company has in the bank?

------
dnsworks
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.

------
shaayak
damn 30 points in 15 minutes!

------
noarchy
You think this teen was influenced by what he saw around him? Media people get
freebies and perks all the time. Was this kid's mistake in the fact that he
asked for them? Or that he got caught doing so?

------
whalesalad
I'm pretty sure the intern was Daniel Brusilovsky... he tweeted about "writing
the hardest email he's ever had to write" and all his posts are 404'ing on TC.

The tweet of his: <http://twitter.com/danielbru/status/8523812779>

~~~
jasonwilk
it was him

~~~
herdrick
Guys, don't. This isn't an adult you're talking about.

