
The Rules Apply To Everyone - vaksel
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/13/the-rules-apply-to-everyone/
======
kyro
I was waiting for him to address the last.fm post about them handing user
information over to the RIAA. He really should've taken it a step further
beyond merely disclosing your sources, to validating them as well. I feel this
was kind of a vague shot at addressing the last.fm debacle. I do think it's
noble of him to pull out of companies for the sake of TC's credibility, but
there are other changes that should be made as well.

------
numair
This is so utterly irrelevant. Once again, with an ominous title and tons of
upvotes, I am baited into checking out what turns out to be nothing more than
a pundit war. Thanks, guys!

~~~
tptacek
Strong disagree. I'm not entirely sure why people care what Dave Winer thinks,
but Arrington wields a lot of influence, and everyone who plays ball with him
increases TechCrunch's importance.

------
tptacek
There are sins of commission and sins of omission; for instance, TC doesn't
seem to have done any reporting on Mahalo's secret botnet herder admin (a
major story in every other news outlet), and on the flip side hasn't corrected
egregriously unfounded rumors about Last.fm.

A pox on all their houses.

~~~
Tichy
What secret botnet herder admin? Did it make it to HN?

~~~
tptacek
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=504597>

------
physcab
It's good to see someone take such a hard stance on integrity. Unfortunately
we live in world filled with dishonesty and are constantly witnessing the
implosions of such individuals/companies.

MA didn't have to do what he did. It's also true that he takes a great deal of
criticism for what he says and how he says it. But I have much respect for
someone who blows the whistle publicly.

------
kaiserama
"...as more and more ads are placed on our site"

Maybe I'm jaded into believing there really is no such thing as "objective
reporting" anymore, seems everyone has a conflict of interest or 3 these days.

~~~
mrkurt
The good publications work very hard to firewall content production and ad
sales. Having watched this process in a few "good publications", I think it
can work pretty well.

~~~
kaiserama
I agree with your statement in principle, the problem arises when there may be
warranted negative publicity involving one of their paid advertisers.
Obviously as a business owner you don't want to jeopardize your source of
income, but as a "journalist" are you really staying true to mission to be
objective? And thus...a conflict of interest is born.

Cheers!

------
vinutheraj
_people who obtain power can convince themselves that the very rules they
create and enforce don’t apply to them._

Hehe that is so ironic coming from Arrington !!

------
wumi
the problem with the spitzer example is that Spitzer KNEW he was going to get
caught ... some might see Spitzers actions as an "escape" for a man who wanted
out, and had no way out from the track of success, except a moral failure.

c'mon now, he was the attorney general, do you seriously think he didn't know
he was going to get caught?

------
Radix
It sounds like he was putting his money where his mouth was, but now can't?
Which is better, more useful, a blogger that understands and takes part in an
industry, or one that strictly comments?

~~~
vaksel
Its not like his "money where his mouth is" approach worked. Look at the
companies he invested in...they are very mediocre. A few social sites(one for
dogs/one for dancing), a video site(seesmic), and an internet storage site.
Nothing truly spectacular or ground breaking. Nothing that had any major
success. I don't think he is yet to have an exit....I don't count edgio
because that was a joke exit.

The only thing in his portfolio that was successful is Techcrunch

~~~
chris11
If that is true, that might be why he is divesting. I really don't think his
investments are unethical, as long as they are always disclosed.

But his investments might slightly affect his objectivity, and get his
credibility attacked. And since they are not success, there is no reason he
should keep them.

~~~
vaksel
frankly I think him having the ability to disclose his investments actually
was beneficial for him. He was able to plug his sites a lot more times. i.e.
any time he covered a competitor

------
JabavuAdams
Your customers don't know who Mike Arrington is, and they don't care whether
he likes you, whether he hates you, whether you like him, or whether you hate
him.

Incest, much? Work more.

------
mojonixon
more work, less circle jerk

------
ryanwaggoner
Though I understand the motivation, it's sad to see another angel closing up
shop, especially now. We need all of them we can get.

------
time_management
I'm glad that Michael Arrington is a firm believer in fair play and
egalitarianism:

<http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/03/02/back-i-am/>

 _When my time was up to leave, I asked Potts if I could stay another week. He
said something about being fully booked, but I offered to pay more than his
usual rate and said I’d plug Surfboard House on TechCrunch (consider that a
disclosure). He had (and still has) no idea what TechCrunch is, but the
dollars did the trick. Schedules were juggled, I stayed._

~~~
physcab
haha wow. I feel like that just nullifies my comment below (well, maybe just
part of it).

~~~
time_management
He just made it too fuckin' easy. What, two weeks between those two posts?

