
Time to ditch the arrogant tech blogs - dchs
http://www.kernelmag.com/comment/opinion/1799/time-to-ditch-the-arrogant-tech-blogs/
======
untog
Arrogance, I don't care about. The shameless corruption, I do. PandoDaily, in
particular, is funded by VC firms that also fund tech startups. They're
basically buying coverage for their investments- it's taking the system that
got Arrington fired and putting it on steroids. It works out great for the
investment company, it works out great for their companies, the only person it
doesn't work out for is that actual reader of the blog. It's why I will never
read a PandoDaily article.

As a slightly more on-topic aside- an app I made was recently featured in the
NY Daily News. The results were great- I got some useful feedback from real
users, rather than hypothetical users more interested in gossip.

~~~
Aloisius

      PandoDaily, in particular, is funded by VC firms that also fund tech startups.
      They're basically buying coverage for their investments
    

I would like to point out that HackerNews is run by a VC firm and YC alumni
effectively get free coverage here.

~~~
samstave
But the difference is that HN content is posted by any random user. It is not
employing a staff of self righteous, egotistical reporters to post crap about
YC firms.

The content on HN is more honest, if you will...

~~~
guelo
Except for the administratively front-paged YC ads.

~~~
JohnQPasserby
Except for the _easily distinguishable_ front-paged YC ads.

------
rkudeshi
I think it's important to note the OP's beef is apparently with TechCrunch EU,
not with the "US" version of TechCrunch we all know and love/loathe.

As far as I know, eu.techcrunch.com is magnitudes smaller than techcrunch.com.

EDIT: Looks like they folded eu.techcrunch.com into the main site at some
point (after writing about eNovella, before writing about Jottify?).

eNovella post on TechCrunch: [http://eu.techcrunch.com/2009/08/10/enovella-
gives-aspiring-...](http://eu.techcrunch.com/2009/08/10/enovella-gives-
aspiring-authors-and-poets-somewhere-to-share/)

Jottify post on TechCrunch: [http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/07/techcrunch-tv-
three-startup...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/07/techcrunch-tv-three-
startup-pitches-from-the-future-of-web-apps-conference/)

Other reasons that could explain the low referral traffic: the eNovella post
was very brief (and, again, on the European site at the time) while the
Jottify mention was literally only one sentence in a brief post that also
included 2 other startups.

EDIT2: Just noticed the author of the TechCrunch post on eNovella, Milo
Yiannopoulos, is now the Editor-in-Chief of the OP site, "The Kernel" (and
author of the 'editor's pick' article at the top of the right sidebar).

Maybe it's a coincidence, maybe it's a hatchet job on his former employer.
Either way, I think it should merit a disclosure in the OP's article, no?

<http://www.kernelmag.com/editorial-staff/>

~~~
nikcub
I picked up on the same point because the numbers just sounded too stupid low
not to look into, I should have checked the comments here first.

I didn't pick up on the editor of Kernel and the author of the post being the
same person - something that should be disclosed.

Explains why they didn't link to the posts!

Shame because in the previous thread about tech blogs The Kernel was mentioned
as a good, new alternate source. Turns out they are not too different ..

------
kylemaxwell
I've reached the conclusion that a particular subset of the big tech blogs are
to our industry as the celebrity gossip rags are to the entertainment
industry.

~~~
CaptainZapp
With the obvious difference that gossip rags don't have a financial stake in
the stars, starlets, models, semi-celebrities and wannabees on which they're
reporting.

While it's simple dreck, it's not so insidiously corrupt like the tech blogs.

~~~
danso
I think you're quite wrong on this, about the financial stake part, at least.

Gossip rags' fortunes thrive when there are big stars in the media. No
Brangelina, Lindsay Lohan, Suri Cruz, Lady Gaga, etc., means overall less
interest in gossip/celebrity news, thus fewer pageviews. So, there's an
implicit interest to drum up fervor/attention, including coining attractive-
easy branding phrases like, "Brangelina."

Celebrity agents work in tandem with publications all the time, offering them
"scoops", such as, "Lindsay is going to be eating at [swank restaurant] at 7PM
with her new respectable BF" in exchange for favorable coverage that makes
their client look good.

And then of course, there are the many instances in which a publication will
outright pay millions of dollars for exclusive rights to photos:
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_(magazine)#Competition_f...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_\(magazine\)#Competition_for_celebrity_photos)

> _"People reportedly paid $4.1 million for newborn photos of Shiloh Nouvel
> Jolie-Pitt, the child of Angelina Jolie and Brad Pitt.[2] The photos set a
> single-day traffic record for their website, attracting 26.5 million page
> views._

~~~
CaptainZapp
There's still a difference between being in a symbiotic relationship with the
subjects you cover and the rags that cover you and having a direct financial
interest in the subjects (or companies) you cover.

The latter being arguably the biggest journalistic sin.

It would only really be the same thing if (say) Gala has a 10% stake in "The
Brangelina Project" or an option on the gross receipts of their next movie.

I'm not claiming that those rags are lillywhite. For example: I know for a
fact that reviews are sold for cash.

However, in my opinion that's not the same level of corruption then a
"journalist" covering a company in which he has equity.

~~~
slantyyz
Well, if the movie industry is advertising in said rag, doesn't that translate
into a financial stake? It may not be direct investment, but talking (even
negatively) about celebrities is still buzz that draws audiences to the movies
those celebrities are going to be in.

------
danso
Let's just assume for the sake of argument that tech blogs aren't inherently
wrong/evil/corrupt/worthless/etc.

I don't see why this has to be an either-or proposition...absolute number of
referrals aren't the only "good thing" to come out of any promotional
activity. Isn't it possible that a prominent mention gets you views/usage from
people who are in a position to propel you forward?

Ask an investigative journalist: their 10,000 to 20,000 word, 1-year-opus will
likely generate fewer page views than the high school basketball playoff
recap. But as long as those viewers consist of politico staff members, agency
policymakers, and judicial enforcement people...then absolute number of
viewers is not the only vital metric.

------
T_S_
Corrupt practices are only possible if they are hidden. Journalists like WSJ's
Mossberg are able to maintain their credibility only because they keep it
simple by not taking cash or freebies and restating that policy frequently.

If Blog X wants to take cash and freebies and then let me know about it in a
nicely formatted web page, that's fine. I can keep reading and make a case by
case judgement of their opinions. If not they are playing the game of
monetizing their reputation and will one day be asking their hidden patrons
for a job, or finding a new industry. Note the key driver in all this:
transparency.

------
jilebedev
> Time to ditch the arrogant tech blogs

No. Time to stop disguising attacks at media outlets as constructive advice.

If the author had wanted to be constructive, the article would have read along
these lines: "It's a tough problem to find out what media your audience
consumes, and then cater your PR toward that media outlet. Here's how we
screwed that up, here's what we did to fix it, and here's how you can avoid
making the same mistake".

------
volaski
I've been covered on Techcrunch, Mashable, ReadWriteWeb, TheNextWeb, GigaOm,
Lifehacker, etc., multiple times, and I can say for sure that this guy doesn't
know what he's talking about.

Sure it's not as effective as long time ago when there used to be this thing
called "being Techcrunch'd", but it's nowhere as ineffective as that guy
pointed out. It doesn't matter if his original statement included the part
about "techcrunch UK" or not. His argument is based on his limited experience
of being covered on TechCrunch UK which no one even reads, and a little
mention from a short story.

I wouldn't say "ditch the arrogant tech blogs because they're not effective",
if I've never been really covered by one. If you get covered properly, it
still brings in tons of traffic.

~~~
xpose2000
I am bitter and jealous. :(

------
nikcub
Those numbers sounded too low, which prompted me to look into it.

They were both featured on other editions of Techcrunch, not the main site.
One was on Techcrunch UK[1], with a short post, the other on Techcrunch TV
(way down with a single link in a short story)[2], both before the merge.

To say that it is important to the point of the story to mention that they
weren't featured on the main Techcrunch site is an understatement. While the
EU and TV properties pre-merger were doing well, the main site is an order of
magnitude larger.

I used to work at TC, but I still refer a lot of startups there for stories
and have been keeping up with the numbers. You can expect referrals in the
range of a few thousand to up to 40k. In terms of the 'startup' space (that is
anything funding related, launch announcements, hiring announcements etc.)
there is usually no better outlet, since every single venture capitalist,
journalist, blogger, entrepreneur, potential executive employee etc. reads the
site.

The exception is if you are in a niche which can be better served by other
blogs.

Being featured on Techcrunch usually leads to a couple of more blog posts from
other sites, and it can usually lead to appearing on Techmeme - which every
tech blogger and journalists checks regularly every day.

There is no doubt that with a good product a mainstream media feature will get
you more long-term users. Every startup and announcement is different, you
need to take all fo this into account when considering where and how you want
to release your news.

What I can tell you is that a feature on TC definitely doesn't send referrals
in the dozens - I think the post should be updated to clarify that.

\--

Update: I just got a response from the author of the OP on Twitter. When I
asked him why there was no mention of his stories being on TC Europe and no
links to them, he replied[3]: "I actually did, I'm not sure why but they seem
to have disappeared in the editing process. I'll try to get them put back in."
and "Btw, both were featured on the TC Europe homepage in the main stream. I
appreciate it probably should be more clear."

It is probably worth mentioning at this point that 'the editor' of The Kernel
(although he may not have been the editor of this post), Milo, was the same
guy who wrote the story on TC[1] referred to in the post. He worked at TC
Europe and is now the editor at The Kernel - they somehow talked around this
fact in the post without mentioning it.

I just pinged him on Twitter to ask if he removed the references or if they
were simply just lost somehow.

\--

Update 2: Further, from the author: "Mm, but this was a while back (2009),
Milo has made no secret of being frustrated with TC Europe. I'm writing of my
own volition." [5] and "I don't think missing links was intentional. I had
also linked to Jottify and a few other things and they're also missing."[6]

From Milo: (when asked if he was editor on that post): "Hi there. No I wasn't
- but I will nip in and make clear"[7]

The links may have been dropped, but there is still no distinction in the
actual content that the post isn't about the main Techcrunch site.

\--

 _note the link is now to techcrunch.com but that is because the sites have
been merged_

[1] [http://techcrunch.com/2009/08/10/enovella-gives-aspiring-
aut...](http://techcrunch.com/2009/08/10/enovella-gives-aspiring-authors-and-
poets-somewhere-to-share/)

[2] [http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/07/techcrunch-tv-three-
startup...](http://techcrunch.com/2011/10/07/techcrunch-tv-three-startup-
pitches-from-the-future-of-web-apps-conference/)

[3] <https://twitter.com/#!/jacklenox/status/190121611578441728>

[4] <https://twitter.com/#!/jacklenox/status/190122178547691520>

[5] <https://twitter.com/#!/jacklenox/status/190126807595495425>

[6] <https://twitter.com/#!/jacklenox/status/190127630606020608>

[7] <https://twitter.com/#!/Nero/status/190127568152838144>

~~~
rvkennedy
Every time a random blog like this surfaces on HN I make a point of
_considering the source_ , by clicking through a few of the other articles. In
this and many other cases, scratch the bland surface of the linked post and
you'll find this kind of nutty political screed:
[http://www.kernelmag.com/yiannopoulos/1786/extreme-
cognitive...](http://www.kernelmag.com/yiannopoulos/1786/extreme-cognitive-
dissonance/)

So handle with care.

------
JVIDEL
Whatever you do, if you get traction you are king.

If you don't no matter how much coverage you get you will go down.

The only precursor for traction are users, tech blog coverage wont do anything
about it: even consumer gadget blogs are niche compared to the mainstream
media, and even then most people care a lot more about gadgets than webapps.

.........unless all their friends are using them, that's when they care, but
that's growth which comes after.......that's right, TRACTION.

------
Hoff
Analyst firms and analyst publications are a related business area where some
folks might be surprised at the processes and procedures that are used to
construct the papers and recommendations.

The analyst data collection process can involve some very bizarre fill-in-the-
spreadsheet questionnaires that are distributed to vendors by the firms, and
there are sponsored technical reports and sponsored product reviews widely
available, to what could be termed a product push poll. More than a little of
what's printed in various publications and that's available at various web
sites is little more than analyst- or vendor-provided text, too. Reworked
press releases.

Informed and impartial product reviews are expensive. Which means they're
comparatively scarce at the "free web site" product tier.

Corruption? No. It's a (sausage-making) business. Look for the disclosure
statements where required, and generally follow the money. If you're not
paying, then you're the product, after all. It's all sausage.

------
dabeeeenster
Ironic that this is coming from The Kernel. The editor is one of the most
arrogant members of the London tech scene - just look at his Twitter feed. He
is one of the very worst offenders when it comes to writing about stuff to try
and cause a stink.

------
helipad
What is supposed to be being ditched here?

If it's the pitching to/grooming of tech blogs, then companies themselves will
decide what's effective for them. Number of referrals is surely just one
measure. Credibility ("as featured on TechCrunch"), SEO (backlink from TC
sounds good to me?), the fact that other journalists read TC, metablogs and so
on.

If we're supposed to be ditching reading the blogs, well then folk will do
that naturally over time if the quality of content falls.

More than anything, we should probably ditch the idea that one well-placed
referral from a powerhouse could be the shot in the arm that might make a
service "go viral".

~~~
gm
I've always wondered on "my startup is credible because I was on TC"...

Wouldn't actual user count and other metrics be more credible than "I was able
to schmooze to some editor"?

~~~
helipad
Sure they would. But if a company has a complimentary quote from a reputable
source then I'm more likely to find it credible than one without.

~~~
gm
Reputable to whom? To the end user?

Unless the end user is a TC reader the endorsement is irrelevant. And that's
my entire point.

------
joejohnson
This article from February talks about the business model used by tech blogs:
[http://www.realdanlyons.com/blog/2012/02/13/hit-men-click-
wh...](http://www.realdanlyons.com/blog/2012/02/13/hit-men-click-whores-and-
paid-apologists-welcome-to-the-silicon-cesspool/)

Interesting discussion about that article here:
<http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3587730>

------
xpose2000
Anyone with a start-up should leave the tech blog schmoozing to the
professional CEOs/VCs who do it on a daily basis.

The bootstrapped start-up with no connections in the industry has slim chances
of being featured in any tech blog.

My best advice is to keep your head down and keep coding and improving your
product.

------
alq
You should hit Techcrunch and the likes when you're about to go fund-raising
because the audience definitely feels like other startups and VCs. If these
are are not your audience you're just wasting your time.

------
rys
Aren't there a number of publications covering this space that are run well
and provide ethical coverage? Just read them instead.

~~~
duxup
Are there? How do you know if they do ethical coverage?

Not trying to be a jerk, seriously asking. How does anyone make those
determinations?

------
sidcool
Does parislemon feature here?

~~~
slantyyz
Adding to your list... how about Calacanis and Scoble?

------
qdpb
So being featured in a tech blog is not a silver bullet? Good to know.

------
ineedafresca
Kind of amusing that this article has such a link baity headline. I was
expecting to see more tech blog bashing, which imho is well deserved.
Nonetheless, this articles point that you should target journalists in your
specific industry, rather than the tech blogs, is sound, but a bit boring.

