Comment by VonGuard | Hacker News Reader

Comment by VonGuard | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Yah, obviously that's the value he's adding. I think it's a zero sum game, however. Shilling isn't going to help a crappy product out in the long term, only the short term.

And it brings up all manner of ethical grey areas: is blogging journalism? Do influencers lose influence when they lose objectivity? What the fuck is an influencer, anyway?

If a journalist is ever an influencer, he or she is doing it wrong...

Buh, I could go on a giant rant here about how journalism is dead, or at least, extremely sick... How am I going to write about people places and events when those people places and events are writing about themselves?

Fortunately, it would seem there is still a consumer for quality, deep journalism on specific topics.

I don't even know what I'm really saying here, anymore... Just that Lyons really hit a nerve. It's super frustrating to be in an interview with someone who makes 10X what you make, and is completely unaware of what's really going on in their industry.... All too common an event.

> And it brings up all manner of ethical grey areas: is blogging journalism?

I believe the crux of the problem is that 'influential bloggers' want all the credibility of journalists ("we're writing and reporting on things!"), without any of the responsibility ("we're just blogging our opinions!").

This is what leads to situations like below:

Then there's the post in December where MG [...] thought he'd uncovered some kind of huge conspiracy when he accused Google's Android chief, Andy Rubin, of deleting a tweet. A few days later Siegler had to recant (sans apology, of course) when it turned out that, um, nope, Rubin hadn’t done that. Of course there’s a simple way to avoid bonehead moves like this — you do the reporting before you publish the accusation, not after.

There already are bloggers with the credibility of journalists (and more) who assume all of the responsibility (and more). We all know this and read these people all day every day.

Dan Lyons is not one of them (SCO), and neither is MG, but MG (and more) is just telling us he is neither a good VC nor journalist, but his (and his friends') wallet would like you to think he was.

tl;dr: MG is innovating the huckster niche.

It's not a zero sum game: money is invested. Money goes from A to B. Media coverage helps convince investors, and customers, or users. One of the most efficient media is advertising disguised as journalism. Hence the legislation on "infomercials" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Infomercial#Criticism_and_legal...).

> And it brings up all manner of ethical grey areas: is blogging journalism?

There's nothing "grey" about it: it's a straightforward conflict of interest. Unethical practices that were mostly stamped out of more mature industries with professional codes of conduct and industry best practices are rife in the tech startup sector.

That's as true of collusive, interested tech journalists as it is of startups collecting sensitive personal information without disclosing it or providing a clear opt-out (or preferably opt-in) provision.

    I think it's a zero sum game, however. Shilling isn't
    going to help a crappy product out in the long term, only
    the short term.

I don't know, they only have to make it as far as a big VC round.

Don't be afraid to be an influencer+blogger. I like Jay Rosen's guide for modern reporting: don't hold to false objectivity. Telling us the motivations you have in reporting gives you the freedom to report on others motivations and not simply parrot what they are saying.

Telling us the motivations you have in reporting gives you the freedom to...

This leaves a gaping hole for unreliable narrators.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com