Looking for Something?
New Media Expo Blog
Navigation
  • Posts Tagged "TechCrunch"
Posts Tagged for

TechCrunch

Another TechCrunch Writer Leaves, But on Good Terms

Author:

TechCrunch writer MG Siegler announced early yesterday morning he’s leaving the tech blog as a full time writer. The timing may seem odd given the latest TechCrunch drama, but Siegler insists this latest move has been a long time in the making.

In a blog post titled “On the Next Venture”, Siegler says that yes, he is becoming a VC.

Enough with burying the lede: yes, I’m becoming a VC. I couldn’t be happier to announce that I’m joining CrunchFund as a general partner. It’s my honor to join Mike and Pat in that role. And I thank them for the opportunity.

Erick Schonfeld also announced Siegler’s leaving on the TechCrunch blog. He says that although Sielger is leaving TechCrunch as a full time writer, he will still write for them as an outside columnist, but on one very specific topic: Apple.

“While MG will only be working full time as a writer at TechCrunch for another month, I am pleased to announce that he will continue to write for us after that on a regular basis as an outside columnist. The scope of what he will write about will be very narrow: Apple. He won’t write about startups or venture capital. And just like he has always done, he will continue to follow our editorial standards, which require strict disclosures for any kind of conflict whatsoever—financial, business, or personal.”

Of course the web is covering this story with headlines such as “The Tech Blogger Bubble is Here” and “Tech blog writers hit the big time“. Some are skeptical about the announcement, while others are focusing on why hiring tech bloggers seems to be a popular thing to do right now.

What does Siegler have to say about this “tech bubble” and crazy valuations?

For all the talk of “bubbles” and crazy valuations, I think most overlook something very fundamental: technology continues to permeate all of our lives in ways we couldn’t imagine just yesterday. This will only continue to increase over time. Technology startups are at the forefront of this. What we’ve seen up until now is just a taste of what is to come.

We wish MG Siegler (read this if you are dying to know what MG stands for; not that it will answer the question for you) the best of luck in his new venture.

So tell us – what are your thoughts on all of the happenings within TechCrunch and the technology blogging realm as a whole?

Image: Twitter

TechCrunch and AOL: Is Selling Your Blog a Mistake?

Author:

When AOL bought TechCrunch back in 2010, it seemed like the perfect pairing. Some were skeptical, but Mike Arrington really seemed pumped about it and encouraged the TechCrunch community to be too, particularly in the post Why We Sold TechCrunch To AOL, And Where We Go From Here. Oh what a difference a year makes, right? I don’t think anyone at TechCrunch in 2010 would have suspected the drama that was to come in 2011. If things don’t change, TechCrunch might even fail.

So was selling the blog a mistake?

Financially, it’s hard to argue that it was. The widely-reported sale price was $25 million (though some believe it was much higher), and while TechCrunch’s popularity means that this money could potentially be made back in just a few short years, the acquisition was still a risk on AOL’s part. So while you can always argue that something was worth more, for argument’s sake, let’s say that TechCrunch did pretty well. I mean, the deal wouldn’t have been signed if both parties weren’t happy with the sale price, right?

What bloggers know to be true, though, is that blogging is about way more than money. I think that’s the key that most companies buying blogs are still missing.

AOL is a large corporation. Their main goal is to make money. Someone like Arianna Huffington has no personal attachment to TechCrunch, and I don’t fault her for that. Why should she? Why should anyone who wasn’t there to build TechCrunch from scratch? TechCrunch isn’t AOL’s baby, it’s blood, sweat, and tears. TechCrunch was…and is…a business investment.

For many of the writers there, TechCrunch is a home. I think most bloggers feel that way. It’s easy to sell a house. It’s hard to sell a home. So when someone says, “We’re going to buy this house, but you can still live here,” it is easy to keep thinking of it as your home.

Only it’s no longer yours, not really.

It’s more like you’re renting the house. You can make it as cozy as a home, but the landlord can come in and paint the walls a color you hate, tear down the deck, or even evict you. Your lease agreement only protects you so much.

When you sell your blog, it doesn’t matter what kind of off-the-record promises were made. Tomorrow, the company that purchases your blog could make decisions that you don’t like, and when that happens, you don’t have any control to stop it. That’s the risk you take when you sell. True editorial independence no longer exists. Even if you have this freedom, it is only because your overlords are allowing it. Your kitchen walls are still that beautiful shade of red you adore because the landlord is allowing it. Tomorrow, the house’s owner could be in a yellow mood. They can change their minds.

And they will, if they think it’s the best choice for their business investment. They haven’t “grown up” with the blog, so they don’t always make the best choices in terms of the community or design or even content. They make the best decisions in terms of money, or so they think. Personally, I feel that any blog ruled by money won’t succeed, at least not to its full potential. That’s not necessarily for me to say, though.Everyone defines success differently.

If you sell your blog, you don’t get to make the decisions anymore. You can dole out advice or even make threats to discontinue your involvement with the blog…but you can’t stop the train once it is moving. Selling your blog is that first chug-a-lug without you as a conductor.

Bloggers can be a stubborn bunch – and I’m definitely including myself in that statement. What a corporation suggests might not be a bad idea, but changes can be scary. It’s really easy to feel the urge to push back whenever anyone suggests that you’re doing something wrong or could be doing something better, especially if you’re already pretty successful. “That’s not how we do things around here.” Well, it is now. When you sell, there are changes that will be made. Even if you think you’re doing the best possible job, outsiders with a different perspective won’t always agree.

So is selling your blog a bad idea?

Yes – if you think it’s going to continue moving forward the exact same way as it is under your leadership. TechCrunch will never be the same. No sold blog is the same afterward. No matter what the terms of the sale, things are going to change. Those changes could be good, if you give them a chance. They could also be horribly wrong, and you could see your baby fail. In my opinion, you shouldn’t sell unless you’re prepared to walk away, enjoy the money, and fondly remember your blog how it was, no matter what it has become.

TechCrunch is not “Too Big To Fail”

Author:

TechCrunch certainly has been dominating headlines recently. I’m having a hard time keeping up.

The quick run-down for those of you also having trouble staying up-to-date: Mike Arrington quit. Or was fired. Or was forced out. No one seems to have a straight answer on that one, but in any case, he’s gone, but he already is sparring with new editor Erick Schonfeld and talking about his next project. Writer Paul Carr quit in what is either a blaze of glory or grandstanding, depending who you ask, by posting his resignation letter on the blog. Schonfeld accepted his resignation in what is either a justified response or unprofessional virtual middle finger, depending who you ask, by posting a response on the blog. Arianna Huffington lashed out at the Wall Street Journal for “shoddy journalism” when covering the TechCrunch drama. By the time I’m done writing this post, who knows what else will happen. There seems to be no shortage of people who want to make news.

The opinion I find most interesting in this crazy story, though, is that of MG Sigler, who has been writing for TechCrunch since 2009. He remained silent for a while, watching the craziness unfold over the past few weeks, but finally felt the need to post his point of view on his personal blog in a post entitled “What Needs To Be Said” – and I find myself agreeing with much of what he writes.

But there’s one part in his post that I keep reading again and again, and it highlights what I think everyone involved is missing:

“Many of you are watching TechCrunch unravel before your very eyes. That sucks. It sucks for me too. But TechCrunch is also too big to fail. One way or another, it will live on. Try as hard as AOL might, they can’t totally f*** it up. That’s just the truth.”

The bold-facing is my work, not Siegler’s. The censoring is mine too, for the record, though that’s not as important. What is important here is Siegler’s assertion that TechCrunch is too big to fail. That seems to be the mindset of most of the people involved in the TechCrunch drama, and even most of the people around the web talking about TechCrunch.

I assure you, TechCrunch is not too big to fail, the same way the Titanic was not unsinkable. Nothing is too big to fail. Ask MySpace. Ask Borders. Ask Circuit City. Ask the Romans.

Was TechCrunch’s sale to AOL a good thing? Is all this drama Arianna Huffington’s fault? Was Erick Schonfeld’s backdoor deal shady or justified? These are all topics we hope to cover in future posts here at the BlogWorld blog, but what I know for certain right now is this: A lot of energy is going into this drama. Imagine if that energy was instead harnessed and channeled into making TechCrunch more successful.

Public problems like we’ve seen with TechCrunch would kill lesser companies. TechCrunch has survived because of their size, and they’ll continue to survive even as employees and ex-employees continue to bicker. But for how long? Certainly not forever, no matter how big they are. Just because they are surviving right now doesn’t mean their survival is guaranteed. When you are wrapped up in your own drama, you lose sight of what you’re doing – providing news and opinions to your community. No community sticks around if they’re ignored. Even the most rabid fans will only put up with shenanigans for so long.

And furthermore, is “just surviving” good enough? Isn’t the goal of any company not to survive, but to thrive?

The fact of the matter is that most TechCrunch readers really don’t care about all  this BS. Sure, it’s entertaining to watch all the drama happening for the same reasons people rubberneck at a car accident, but if TechCrunch can continue to provide the content its community wants, most people don’t give a you-know-what who’s working there. You’ll have hard-core Mike Arrington fans or Paul Carr fans or Huffington haters who will boycott the site, but even the readers who are being vocal will continue to read TechCrunch if the blog focuses on giving the community what it wants.

If they continue to instead focus on the drama, that readership will eventually fade and the site will fail. People don’t go to TechCrunch to see public outbursts. It’s only entertaining for so long before it starts to get annoying. When a company is too wrapped up in internal affairs, it is like a slow trickle of water, which might not seem very powerful until you remember that a relatively small river is responsible for the Grand Canyon.

In my opinion, saying that any company is “too big to fail” is basically saying to the community, “it doesn’t matter what we do because you will never leave us.” I don’t think that’s what anyone at TechCrunch intends to say, but the message is there every time people makes the decision to post nastiness about one another on TechCrunch rather than posting real news. Any community will leave if pushed away for too long. So I hope that TechCrunch stops pushing. Otherwise, the giant will begin to crumble and overtime, it will fall.

TechCrunch Editor Michael Arrington Steps Down After Six Years

Author:

Michael Arrington, the editor of the uber-popular tech blog TechCrunch, has announced he is stepping down after six years on the job.

His next step is to head up the $20m private investment fund, CrunchFund, which is backed by AOL (who purchased TechCrunch last year) and several other venture capitalists.

Here’s a brief description of CrunchFund:

CrunchFund is an early stage venture capital firm founded by Michael Arrington and Patrick Gallagher. The fund invests in and works with information technology companies at any stage but is primarily focused on seed and early stage investments.

You can see all of the big name investors here.

Arrington will still have a role as a writer for TechCrunch, but no editorial control. His departure is raising some eyebrows as to the future of TechCrunch under AOL. Rumors of an AOL sale have also been circulating.

The Guardian reports, “More recently, rumors of a sale or plans to go private have swirled around AOL. The content company’s shares have soared 24% since Monday, to $15.19, amid speculation that the company had met bankers Allen & Company. AOL was also rumored to be considering a sale of its dial-up internet business, which accounts for about half of the company’s $1.62bn market capitalization.”

This announcement, the state of TechCrunch and the state of AOL has everyone in the tech blogging world talking.

Here is some clarification as to the relationship between TechCrunch and CrunchFund, written by TechCrunch writer Paul Carr.

Media Is Not Objective

Author:

As I was reading this post by Paul Carr at TechCrunch this morning it occurred to me that if you substituted the word “Obama” for the word “Apple” Paul would have just written a post that could have been seen on any given conservative political blog any day of the week.

That inspired me to hop on a very old and familiar soap box of mine. But I haven’t been on this particular soap box in quite a while so maybe I can fool you into thinking its new =p.

I agree with Paul, Apple fan boys make me crazy. Particularly when they are supposed to be journalists, even worse when they are supposed to be new media journalists fighting against what we all see as old media biases and bad journalism.

But the underlying point applies to all forms of media including me; and since you are reading this post most likely you too. Everyone of us  brings some bias to the table every time we write a post, create a podcast, or send out a tweet.

The best thing we can all do and the thing we should do is be honest about our own inherent biases.  In that spirit you can find some of my biases at the bottom of this post. But something else we can all do is attempt to limit the influence of our bias in our content. I know its a hard thing to do sometimes **cough** Jets Suck**cough**. See what I mean? If you want to create great content you need to constantly stay on guard to keep from falling into the fanboy trap.

So if you find yourself writing a post that is arguing whether the iPod or the Macbook is the greatest invention in the history of man kind you just might be a fanboy. If you find yourself writing a post about how every time you see the president on TV the birds around you seem to break into song, you might not be the most objective political observer.

Now back to those biases of mine; I love San Diego, the Chargers, the Padres and even the Soccers (one for the thumb baby!), I hate Los Angeles and all their sports teams and no the Raiders are not an LA team you only rented them for a couple of years so get over it Angelinos.  I don’t like the Jets very much now either. That will most likely pass when we crush them next year like we should have this weekend.  I can’t help liking Rex Ryan even if he is a windbag.  I find myself being much more conservative now than when I was younger even if I’m still a registered Democrat.  I am and was a Ford man before they sponsored BlogWorld. With the exception of my 72 El Camino (great car) and an Oldsmobile Delta88 I drove for a month, every car I have ever owned has been a Ford. I am a PC and damn proud of it.  I have used my iPod less than a dozen times and now its broken. So you could characterize me as an anti-Mac Fanboy.  I am an old metal head and prefer Black Sabbath, Metallica and Megadeath to Nirvana and Pearl Jam.  To clarify that’s old Metallica before they cut their hair and released the Black album.  I used to be a Bud man but now prefer a good Guinness or Augustiner.

What are your biases?

Who are you a fanboy of?

What Is The Next Big Event?

Author:

Do you have an event, conference or meeting, besides of course our event which I just talked about, that you want us to know about?   CES was a huge event in Las Vegas last week, and our very own Rick Calvert and Patti Hosking was in attendance along with the reported 150,000 other people all wanting to see what the next cool thing was in consumer electronics.  We at BlogWorld & New Media Expo love to attnd these types of events and we plan to make sure we have someone that can make it to help promote our show and to also report on what we see in the industry and trends and news.  The problem is, it is tough for us to keep track of all of the events in our industry.

Mashable, RWW, TechCrunch and others all have calendars of events and we tend to keep our eyes on those lists to make sure we see all of the events that are reported in those industries, but event they don’t have a handle on all of them.  What I want to know is what are your events?  Are yopu running something that we shoudl attend?  Do you have a conference, or a show, or a trade event in an industry that doesn’t necessarily fit into the tech world or maybe it is on the fringe of social media, or other places you think we should know?  What about in other countries, are you planning on having a show in your city and in your country not in the United States?

With the number of categories our convention and trade show covers, with real estate, business, sports, military service, technology, monetization, politics, etc, etc.  What events are not being publicized that we should attend?  Leave a comment and URL here if you have an event we should notice.  I am also going to start compiling a list of events that are brought to our attention as we want to help you promote your event as much as our own.  If we can make a hub for people to come and find events in the new media world, we would love to help.

I think the next big thing that we may be attending is Affiliate Summit West again in Las Vegas.  Many of our friends and track leaders and speakers all attend that event on affiliate marketing.  Will we be seeing you there?

Facebook and Everyone Else

Author:

facebook I have been trying to figure out how to keep up with the social networks I have for BlogWorld & New Media Expo and my own personal networks.  I have always touted that I can drink from the social media firehose as well as anyone but I have been noticing recently that I am having a hard time with it.  I was going through my own networks and found that my Facebook friends are now joining me on my other networks and vice versa.  Meaning that the hose is getting bigger but at least the water amount stays the same to some extent.

It appears that event within  the back stage scenes that the networks themselves are getting smeared and merged with one another.  I was commenting to my wife that Plaxo’s interface looked somewhat like Facebook’s interface and I am not sure if I am commenting on a Facebook wall or to an email from Plaxo.  Now I see on TechCrunch that the CTO of Plaxo has ended up working with Facebook.  It is hard to keep not only the networks in focus but the lines have blurred with relation to the developers and the people behind the scenes.

In a world of networks everyone is clamoring for market share and it appears that the talent goes with the winner (or is it that the talent goes with the money?  It is a free agent type market these days).  With Facebook talking about an IPO and getting its latest round of funding they are making it difficult for the rest of the players to keep up.  We are seeing a situation of living in a Google World as I always say to living in a Facebook World.  It’s Facebook and then the rest.

Should Oprah Be Allowed To Speak At BlogWorld?

Author:

Wow people can really get their shorts in a twist really quickly in the Blogosphere or in this case the Twittersphere.

Tonight Twitter and the tech blogs were buzzing with talk about Ashton Kutcher’s little challenge to CNN to see who could be the first to get to one million followers on Twitter. Larry King Responded.  Many of the “real Tweeple” were put off with the entire event.

Then our Social Media Director Jim Turner Tweeted this:

So how hard would it be to have Oprah keynote blogworld on the “New Media”?

I then replied:

@Genuine let ask her. @oprah now that you are on Twitter, would you like to come give a keynote at the worlds largest social media event?

Several people were immediately up in arms.  Here is a sampling of the replies:

Kencamp: @blogworld 2 cents worth – BWE is a maybe for us, but Oprah speaking would blow credibility of it all and lead me to opt out I think.

LisaHoffman: @Genuine Guess it depends on who you’re trying to attract. I thought BlogWorld was aimed at SM fans and practitioners, not celeb groupies.

adamkmiec: @blogworld you’ve got to be kidding me

CathyWebSavvyPR: @LisaHoffmann Probably not a good choice for Blogworld. Fun, entertaining, zany, smart? but not keynot. if celeb MCHammer takes it seriously

DougMeacham: @MackCollier Having Oprah speak as an “expert” could damage blogworld expo’s cred w/practitioners but mayB they’re looking 4 a new customer

BethHarte: @Genuine If Oprah Keynotes BlogWorld, I am staying home… Because if she’s a SM expert that means I don’t have enough coin to ever be one.

I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised. Social Media insiders tend to be a little clubby and insular but I sincerely hope the folks above and others who might have a similar knee jerk reaction reconsider their opinion.

Continue Reading

Technorati State of the Blogosphere 2008 Now Available Online

Author:

BlogWorld attendees were first to see this data courtesy of Technorati’s CEO Richard Jalichandra who opened the 2008 BlogWorld & New Media Expo with the highlights of this report. Today Technorati has released part 1 of 4 of the complete report.  Three more segments will be released this week.

My biggest take away from this report?

More bloggers are able to make money from their efforts. As the medium builds in readership

Blogs are Profitable

The majority of bloggers we surveyed currently have advertising on their blogs. Among those with advertising, the mean annual investment in their blog is $1,800, but it’s paying off. The mean annual revenue is $6,000 with $75K+ in revenue for those with 100,000 or more unique visitors per month. Note: median investment and revenue (which is listed below) is significantly lower. They are also earning CPMs.

Bloggers are sophisticated in using self serve tools for search, display, and affiliate advertising, and are increasingly turning to ad and blog networks. Many bloggers without advertising may consider it when their blogs grow – the inability to set up advertising will not be a factor.

I think this is what Technorati means by the medium going mainstream. Obviously we agree here at BlogWorld.

One of the smartest social media experts I know Marshall Kirkpatrick doesn’t.

Erick Shonfeld at Techcrunch doesn’t believe the self reported earnings from bloggers:

The $6,000 a year I can believe. The $75,000 figure is harder to swallow, especially with only 100,000 visitors a month. But directionally there is no doubt that blogs are bringing in more cash.

I am not statistician but maybe serious bloggers who earn income are more likely to respond to the survey?

More thoughts at CNET, Mashable, VentureBeat, A VC,

Join Us Friday June 20th for BlogWorld Radio Our Guest Will Be Bob Cox of the Media Bloggers Association

Author:

***Update 10:09 pm PST****

The link below now points to the archived interview Jim Turner and I conducted with Bob Cox today. A very interesting discussion and I encourage you to listen to the whole thing and share your thoughts in the comments below.

The Media Bloggers Association has posted an update here.

Join Jim Turner, me and our guest Robert Cox President of the Media Bloggers Association on BlogWorld Radio tomorrow at noon PST.

You can call in to 646-716-7047.

***Update 7:16 am June 20***

Poynter Online has a great rundown of posts concerning this controversy here.

If you haven’t heard there is a little drama going on with The Associated Press, A little blog known as The Drudge Retort ;a spoof of the famous or infamous Drudge Report as the case may be.

Very short version of the story, The AP sent several DMCA take down notices to The Drudge Retort. Some of those notices went beyond normal fair use standards. Rogers Cadenhead the publisher of The Drudge Retort complied with several of the notices and called the Media Bloggers Association for help.

Then all hell broke loose. The Blogosphere is railing against the AP. Jeff Jarvis has been very vocal. Sites like TechCrunch and Little Green Footballs are banning all AP content.

Mike Arrington and numerous others suspect a conspiracy between The AP, The NYT and The MBA.

Others are calling the MBA a flat out scam and even attacking the man at the center of this bruhaha Cadenhead.

Now some are coming to the MBA and Cox’ defense.

What is the real story? I don’t know and the truth is most folks in the Blogosphere don’t either but that doesn’t stop many from forming opinions and lynching parties.

So Join us tomorrow at noon PST on BlogWorld Radio where we hope to get the MBA’s side of the story from Robert Cox. Please call in 646-716-7047 and give us your take or leave a comment below if you have any questions you would like us to ask.

Learn About NMX

NEW TWITTER HASHTAG: #NMX

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives