
Are People Finally Getting Bored with the Tech-Blog Circle Jerk? - Brajeshwar
http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2012/04/tech-blog_pando_daily.php
======
alaskamiller
I always saw Silicon Valley inevitably being covered and cared about as much
as the Hollywood insidery cabal of power and influence.

As much as we believe in the ideas, teams, executions, it's still very much an
old boys network. Don't fool yourself otherwise.

The community upturns its nose constantly about gossip or fluff. But you don't
get it, that's all there really is. Gossip and fluff. Tech reporting is as dry
and pointless. How many times can you rehash someone releasing, fixing,
investing, or selling something?

On top of all this we got exactly the tech reporting culture we deserved.
People clamor for dispatches from foreign lands, substantial news, authentic
stories but here's the real secret... there's no demand for those things.

There is demand to sell ads on pages. There is demand to hire expensive
publicists to befriend the journalists that switch from site to site like
musical chairs. There is demand for real time updates of something happening
because we're digital addicts. Read Silicon Alley Insider for a day and watch
how they wring blood out of stone.

The game is rigged. We know to win you adorn your hastily put together A/B-ed
MVP LP with TechCrunch and Mashable logos. Or you syphon off mojo storytellers
that have consistently the past 5 years been slowly making the story equal
part themselves; their backs scratched by everyone eagerly waiting their turn.
Be that way long enough and you get dangerously jaded not caring whether it's
fingernails or a knife.

If you don't like it, too bad, millions do. And the millions more that's
descending into Silicon Valley seeking their fame and fortune do too.

It is what it is.

~~~
nikcub
In the tech industry we definitely make celebrities of the wrong people. I
can't recall a single other industry where journalists are the top-tier talent
attraction, and I can't explain why that is. The closest in influence is
perhaps the top editors in fashion - but otherwise we are in a league of our
own (I have seen small-time contributors to Techcrunch get mobbed at tech
events).

I have watched new tech bloggers starting out in the right direction and then
getting dragged in by the mob to insert themselves into the story. The entire
context of tech journalism shifts from reporting the facts to reporting on
them reporting and before you know it every half-wit tech blogger has their
own column where they endow the world with their opinion of things. Before
long they are opining as 'we' - meaning they are speaking on behalf of
everybody else (which for me is a lot worse than the worse style of 'I'
editorial). There are more opinion-style journalists in tech than there are
straight up reporters, and that says something.

And it is the entire audience that is culpable, not just the lovers, but the
haters as well. If your intention as an opinion journalist is to get a
reaction from people, then the haters are participating and perpetuating just
as much as the fans are. I know a lot of tech bloggers who would furiously
refresh the comments after they post the piece and look forward to the hate as
much as they look forward to the applause. A lot of them _intentionally_ rile
up their audience just to get that reaction - sometimes even publishing a
point-of-view they don't believe in just to get that rise out of the haters.

It may be because the real heros of this industry are less accesible, so we
turn those who we have ready access to into faux heroes and villains. The
movie and film industry has privacy invading gossip pages for readers to get
their gossip fix from, they also have regular movies and awards shows. We
don't have that with Zuckerberg, so we do it to whoever is next in line.

You can't observe tech gossip or talk about it without participating in it.
All you can do is completely ignore it - but ignore it without saying that you
are ignoring it, because that means you really aren't ignoring it.

I don't think that will happen though, there may be less interest in some
stories at times but the gossip will always be there, it is part of human
nature. We just gossip about the wrong part of the industry in tech.

~~~
zerostar07
I think you mean "tech journalism industry" maybe?

My perception from back when i was reading lots of tech blogs is that tech
journalists are just not good journalists, almost all of them (I can't think
of an exceptional case, no offense intended). They almost never do real world
research, just rely on google, big newspapers, press releases, the random dude
who calls to promote his new website and lately on HN / reddit (that strikes
me as extremely lazy). You almost never read discussions or interviews with
actual tech people in a calm, focused tone (a-la charlie Rose), their
attention span is that of the average redditor and the thought process is
usually shallow. Articles go out in minutes, they wait for commenters to
correct them, and the opinions are tailored to the fan crowd in order to
provoke the usual fan/troll replies and pageviews. You say that the "real
heroes are inaccessible", but i wonder if tech bloggers try hard enough to
access them.

~~~
nikcub
Yes, I did mean the tech journalism industry

I have found that more recently some of the most interesting writing has been
done by part-timers on their personal blogs. Security and privacy
investigations, analysis of markets and startups. HN is a good way of
aggregating the best of those posts.

------
jgrahamc
Personally, I got bored of it long ago and just simply stopped reading. It's
not that hard to do.

~~~
andyking
I'm similar. I never made a conscious decision, or said to myself "right, I'm
never reading TechCrunch again," it was just something that sort of happened.

I gradually unsubscribed feeds in Google Reader that were generating too much
uninteresting stuff, I stopped visiting sites, I got busy doing things of my
own.. and before I knew it, I was tech-blog-free.

It's not like I know any less about what's going on in the world of tech
without them; I just get a lot less clutter in my life.

~~~
antr
Same here. I stopped following Siegler, Arrington, Sarah Lacy & co cause their
arrogance and writing was just unbearable. They call themselves
journalists/bloggers, but all they want is something in exchange for you
appearing on their site/feed. That is not journalism.

These guys stopped writing about tech a long time ago, and instead started
writing about their close (relational/economic) interests.

~~~
seanp2k2
TechCrunch and related acts are just /tech tabloids/ now. Media literacy in
the USA has been on a steep decline in the past 50 years, as evidenced by how
these people still make and break startups. See also: things like Fox News
blaming Obama for high oil prices instead of speculation in oil futures.

The emperor has no clothes.

~~~
methoddk
The fact that the tech industry has given them the power to "make or break"
startups is insane. These people are horrible writers, and the fact that
anyone gives them the time of day is _insane_. Posts from TC, Pando, and the
like, AND posts _about_ them, shouldn't be allowed on HN.

------
nikcub
> they left AOL after AOL told them they were violating the most basic of
> journalism ethics rules by investing the companies they were writing about.

This isn't true. Mike left AOL because Arriana was getting too hands on. There
were a lot of little control decisions that lead to the decision to leave.

He left and _then_ setup Crunchfund, with an investment from AOL. He was
supposed to continue as a contributor, just like many other contributors who
are also investors or entrepreneurs but declined on that as well. MG remained
as a contributor.

As for the circle jerk being boring, I couldn't agree more (and I know the
people involved, most of them well). What you have to keep in mind is that
when something is made public, there is a motive for that. There is a reason
why readers are being informed, and it usually isn't a good reason (for eg.
claiming 'in view of full disclosure' and then telling half the story and
leaving comments closed).

But if you are going to call out the circle-jerk and how boring it is, first
make your story accurate (not difficult, all the details are spread out across
the various blogs) and second at least back-up the claim that people are
starting to tire of it, for eg. the fact that only one other blog wrote about
the latest bust-up, or that it only rated a mention on twitter amongst other
bloggers who joked about it.

The 'dirty laundry' posts used to be a lot more popular than they are now, and
that means they are having little effect to their purpose of riling up
readers. It would have taken a single paragraph to lay that point out, this
just reads like somebody who jumped right into the circle jerk and is riding
coat tails. The tone is one of speaking condescendingly on behalf of the rest
of the world, but in attempting to do that he has stepped a bit too close to
the action and got himself messy. And as has already been mentioned, we really
really really don't give a shit - and that includes you.

------
methoddk
This is an article that needed to be written. Tech shouldn't be a popularity
contest like the attention-deprived "journalists" that were called out in the
article. The whole lot of them have a psychological disorder that needs
treatment, probably stemming from lack of attention from their peers in high
school.

It's fairly clear that the information in TC and/or Pando is biased. Neither
should be supported, ever. Stop the popularity contest that these people are
turning our passion into!

------
rdl
TheVerge has become my favorite "mainstream" tech publication, largely because
it covers actual tech news, rather than self-referential articles about tech
journalism.

~~~
Angostura
Ars is still excellent.

~~~
ilamont
Ars, Tech Review, and Wired (birdman hoax aside) are very relevant tech
publications that cover trends that everyone who works in technology should be
aware of.

Like many people here, I get most tech headlines via Hacker News. Sometimes I
use Twitter. I used to be a big Techmeme fan, but I've noticed A) the best
stories on TM tend to show up on HN first and B) most other TM content is the
commodity Apple/FB/gadget news and blog theater that I am trying to get away
from.

------
Aloisius
Given how many years the political circle jerk known as cable news has been
going, I believe there may be an infinite appetite for this stuff.

~~~
Spearchucker
Warning: Rant.

There is indeed. Western culture has undergone a value shift. Today's values
are superficial in the extreme - we value money, personality[1], and social
status. We "want respect"[2], and don't want to be "judged"[3].

Most of all, we crave others' approval.

The old values like integrity, honesty, empathy, conscientiouness and
authenticity have been tossed aside.

It's also the reason people like Arrington will maintain that status quo. This
article does nothing to change that. People KNOW what's being done here. And
yet people always go back for more, because of these new, superficial values.
Who we hang with is much more important than what we do.

The most amazing thing about it is that we value money over happiness. Just
yesterday I read a post here that bemoaned guys with talent who don't deliver.
Well, news flash. The guy with talent that doesn't turn his talent into
something tangible is invariably happier than the guy who does. The number one
regret of old people is having worked too much.

This value shift is a result of fear. Of a lack of confidence. If you can go
through life without needing others' approval (looking at you, Mssrs
Arrington, Siegler, Carr, and Lacy) you're free to _be happy_. And content.

Ever seen The Big Country with Gregory Peck? _That_ guy was a role model worth
modelling.

[1] That word is so out of place. _Everybody_ has _a_ personality.

[2] Respect is earnt, not given. If I "dis" someone it's because said someone
hasn't _done_ anything to earn my respect.

[3] The human brain protects itself from overload by filtering value from
noise. We categorise what's left. That means _judging people_ , every day,
every time we meet someone new. It's what we do. We can't not do it.

~~~
rmc
_Western culture has undergone a value shift. Today's values are superficial
in the extreme - we value money, personality[1], and social status. We "want
respect"[2], and don't want to be "judged"[3].

Most of all, we crave others' approval.

The old values like integrity, honesty, empathy, conscientiouness and
authenticity have been tossed aside._

This is not a new idea. In the year ~ 100 AD the Roman poet Juvenal wrote:

 _Already long ago, from when we sold our vote to no man, the People have
abdicated our duties; for the People who once upon a time handed out military
command, high civil office, legions — everything, now restrains itself and
anxiously hopes for just two things: bread and circuses_

This attitude that "Everyone was great and hard working in the past, but now
everyone's superficial" is common enough.

~~~
Terretta
How'd that Roman Empire turn out for them, once they got their bread and
circuses?

When claiming that this "fall of civilisation" talk is always around, I'm not
sure drawing comparisons to the era leading to the fall of Rome is really
bolstering your case. Quite the opposite.

~~~
arnsholt
For one thing, Juvenal was several centuries before the fall of Rome. The sack
of Rome by the Goths was in 476. Second, this kind of rhetoric is more or less
ubiquitous, just like the "the youth of today don't respect their elders"
line.

~~~
jdminhbg
Minor historical correction: The Goths sacked Rome in 410. 476 marks the date
that Odoacer deposed the emperor Romulus Augustulus and didn't claim the
throne or try to prop up a different emperor.

------
pilgrim689
Posting an article about articles about people gossipping about gossip doesn't
help.

------
Shank
I'm more annoyed with the constant barrage of either Facebook, Apple, or
Google getting in trouble because of privacy each week. Even when there is
really no story at all (conceptual Google Glasses? Privacy! Instagram being
bought, despite no TOS changes? Privacy!).

~~~
pyre

      > Instagram being bought, despite no TOS changes?
      > Privacy!
    

To be fair, this means that all of the Instagram data becomes a part of
Facebooks 'profile' on you. I'm willing to accept a looser TOS when my data is
silo'd into many different places that aren't necessarily talking to each
other. When all my data becomes consolidated into the same place, I want more
strict reins over what happens to it. Much in the same way the rules change
for businesses that find themselves in monopoly positions.

------
crag
I hate to break it to you; but outside the "Valley Bubble", no one cares.
Really.

------
keithpeter
I'm not sure if I'm adding any value here, but this was the first article
linked from HN's front page that have read for a while and which _I did not
understand what it was about_. I have done some research, and I think I
understand now.

People who can write well want to get paid for writing. Some kind of business
model has to emerge that allows that to happen. Can we assume that advert
driven blogging is not that model?

PS: on a netbook, the page design means that I spent some time looking for the
actual _content_.

------
meiji
I was told a long time ago that if the journalist/publication IS the story,
something has gone wrong (excluding genuinely serious news like NewsCorp or
the journos killed in Syria). Any time someone who runs a news website and
spends almost as much time trying to convince you of their value as the value
of the stories they're writing you have to ask what the purpose is. In most
cases, it's to establish themselves for future money making ventures, not for
the journalism.

~~~
Pelayo
And excluding gonzo journalists like Hunter S. Thompson.

------
justauser
Pando and TechCrunch, can you guys report on the ground in Syria or Libya or
Myanmar (or any place where life is actually happening) regarding the
tech/start-up scene? I'd love to actually hear something of interest from
you(and not about you) folks for a change.

~~~
sriramk
To be fair, Sarah Lacy has done more in covering startup ecosystems around the
world than any tech journalist I know.

------
Tyrannosaurs
These sites are the tech equivalent of the newstand tabloids or Hello
magazine. They package themselves in such as way as to give themselves a
veneer of respectability but they're somewhere between fluff and gossip at
best, out and out product placement or PR at worst.

There's no difference between the articles they write and the thinly disguised
endorsements for a particular moisturiser brand you get in women's magazines
written by someone who has just come back from an all expenses paid spa day
sponsored by a cosmetics manufacturer.

We should stop referring to people who write and work for these sites as
journalists and start referring to them as public relations people because
really that's what they are.

------
n72
I couldn't understand why the startup of which I was a member, which was 2
years old and sold for half a billion in January wasn't covered in Tech
Crunch. I guess this explains it.

~~~
_exec
Enlighten us :)

------
chrismealy
Yes.

~~~
zeeone
A thousand times YES!

------
dclowd9901
Please God, let it be so. If Robert Scoble blows his nose, Tech Crunch is all
over it.

------
dgregd
Is there any Chrome extension which hides links to TechCrunch and similar
pages? I treat these links like ads.

~~~
Tyrannosaurs
Which is basically what they are...

------
j_baker
I can't help thinking of this kind of thing as being like driving by a 10-car
pileup on your commute home. You know you're not supposed to stop and stare,
but you do anyway.

------
msrpotus
Sure but I just ignore it. Plenty of useful, actually informative stuff out
there. Why waste your time on hype and self-promotion?

------
andrewcooke
"madam, the things these fallen women do would make your hair curl"

"oh vicar, this is terrible. please, do go on"

------
dpcheng2003
More like tech-blog infinite loop.

~~~
jsherer
I like this much more than the vulgar title.

------
scott_s
I'm confused. This article is an _example_ of someone talking about silly
gossip.

------
techfiltered
We're taking a run at tech news agg. We are breaking news faster than Techmeme
and we try to provide some useful insights from the data we aggregate -
<http://techfiltered.com/funding-index>

