The Silicon Cesspool

February 14, 2012 9:16 AM

Hit men, click whores, and paid apologists: Welcome to the Silicon Cesspool, by Dan Lyons (aka Fake Steve Jobs) digs into the lying, collusion, and rotten dealings that surround tech journalism in the Valley.

FTA: "The line from one VC firm that invested in CrunchFund was this: “A few hundred thousand is a rounding error for us. We don’t care if we never see the money again. It’s so small it doesn’t even affect our results and isn’t even considered material enough to be reported to our limited partners. And it couldn’t hurt to have Mike as a friend.”

posted by smitt (55 comments total)

In related news, ex-smoker has stunning revelation that smoking is bad and has become a sanctimonious prick.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:22 AM on February 14 [8 favorites]

I'll just add to this exactly what Dan Lyons quoted at the end of the article:
"The only thing I can offer is the advice to take everything you read in the technology press with a grain of salt. Perhaps several. The likelihood that at least part of it is nonsense is very strong. And stronger by the day."
posted by smitt at 9:22 AM on February 14

There are 175 comments on the hacker news post discussing Lyons' blog post. What does he call it when he himself is click whoring?
posted by bukvich at 9:23 AM on February 14

What does he call it when he himself is click whoring?

I believe he calls it "journalism."
posted by Mister Fabulous at 9:24 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]

I'm guessing Dan Lyons isn't exactly eating government cheese.
posted by cjorgensen at 9:25 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

Nothing here very surprising. I gave up on TechCrunch a while ago when I got tired of their transparent shilling and general nonsense. I read The Verge a bit which seems semi-better than Crunch or Gismoto but still not really journalism.
posted by octothorpe at 9:30 AM on February 14

Wow, talk about shooting the messengers. Stay classy, MeFi.

Of course, the real advice is to not read the technology press. Or the non-technology press, for that matter. Go to original sources, actually independent journalists (I hesitate to use that word, it's become so sullied), the general public (for things like reviews) and your own brain.
posted by DU at 9:31 AM on February 14 [3 favorites]

It's not so much shooting the messenger as it is pointing and mocking a hypocrite who is stating the obvious.
posted by entropicamericana at 9:35 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

I've never heard of Uncrunched before, but apparently it's a blog by a multi-millionaire (who makes his money by blogging) that has a header banner saying "Unpaid Blogger"?

Is that supposed to be ironic?
posted by demiurge at 9:37 AM on February 14

I read The Verge a bit which seems semi-better

The Verge fucking sucks. They should just be a telephone website, because that is all they can actually talk about. They keep reviewing cameras and all sorts of other things and it physically hurts me to read somebody being paid to authoritatively type shit about something they are completely clueless about.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 9:37 AM on February 14

DU:

I agree completely: my knowledge of international affairs always comes directly from the original sources, and so I stay exceptionally well informed and free of 'press' bias.

Of course, I paid $137,000 in airfare last year, but that was a small price to pay.
posted by leotrotsky at 9:37 AM on February 14

Dan Lyon? That's the guy who wrote article after article about how Linux was doomed when SCO was (erroneously) suing people left and right but who now is rooting for it via Android? That Dan Lyon?

The same Dan Lyon who created a mock blog ridiculing a CEO who then went on to perform one of the greatest corporate turnarounds history?

That Dan Lyon?
posted by PenDevil at 9:38 AM on February 14 [6 favorites]

Dan Lyon? That's the guy who wrote article after article about how Linux was doomed when SCO was (erroneously) suing people left and right but who now is rooting for it via Android? That Dan Lyon?

Stopped clock, etc.
posted by ryoshu at 9:39 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

Of course, I paid $137,000 in airfare last year, but that was a small price to pay.

You sure know a lot about the quality of service on airplanes, I gather.
posted by elpapacito at 9:44 AM on February 14

Great piece, thanks for the link.
posted by mr.marx at 9:58 AM on February 14

I've never heard of Uncrunched before, but apparently it's a blog by a multi-millionaire (who makes his money by blogging) that has a header banner saying "Unpaid Blogger"?

Is that supposed to be ironic?

It's a slam against AOL. Some backstory.
posted by michaelh at 10:00 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

Uncrunched

That is Arrington since he got ousted from AOL.

Anyway Dan Lynons is comment on a system in which "journalists" cover their own investments as if they are impartial. This isn't about getting a couple hits off Hacker News, this is guys making millions investing in startups and then hyping them.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:02 AM on February 14 [3 favorites]

MG Siegler's response.
posted by donovan at 10:02 AM on February 14

Wait, people are defending Arrington and Siegler? Oh dear.
posted by mr.marx at 10:05 AM on February 14 [6 favorites]

Arrington, Gruber, Siegler, and Lyons are all sitting around a poker table somewhere, laughing at the ad impression income stream this forced controversy is causing.
posted by mrbill at 10:05 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

donovan: "MG Siegler's response."

That looks precisely like the type of thing that Lyons accuses him of writing. Not a word about the one real fact in the Lyons article - the CEO of Path lied and got a free pass from these guys.
posted by vanar sena at 10:08 AM on February 14 [3 favorites]

Thanks, michaelh. At least it makes sense now.
posted by demiurge at 10:12 AM on February 14

...but mrbill is right, this stuff is adolescent clique drama and I'm ashamed that I visited their websites.
posted by vanar sena at 10:14 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

I had a realization recently. I hate marketing people. Loathe them. There's a comic whose schtick is basically, "you're in marketing? Kill yourself" and I never laugh. But there's a form of life lower than marketing people, who at least have a product or service they need to sell. And, yes, that's the blogger. Bloggers are marketing people who have nothing to sell, except perhaps themselves.

Is there a worse thing than "kill yourself?"
posted by seanmpuckett at 10:14 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]

Not sure how Gruber is involved in this microcontretemps, Mr. Bill.
posted by joeclark at 10:15 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

Arrington, Gruber, Siegler, and Lyons are all sitting around a poker table somewhere, laughing at the ad impression income stream this forced controversy is causing.

That seems unlikely; the point of this article it that ad impression income is insufficient and that these bloggers may actually be using their online presence as a loss leader to make Real Money through shady quid pro quo arrangements in the very industries that make up their beat. Lyons, for his part, still has a day job at Newsweek and has written a few books. Gruber, as far as I can tell, probably does make the bulk his income through his blog, but why is he grouped with the others?
posted by 2bucksplus at 10:21 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

Not sure how Gruber is involved in this microcontretemps, Mr. Bill.

It is because everything in the idiotsphere of "tech journalism" is about fucking telephones now, and that guy writes about telephones too.
posted by Threeway Handshake at 10:22 AM on February 14 [3 favorites]

I think it may be bit more important than adolescent clique drama.

When a startup takes a blogger as a tiny minority shareholder they are really getting a free PR flack. A flack you may not even know is flacking.

What happens is Path steals your address book and comes out looking better than ever.

These guys are not going to come out against a company they are invested in even though we expect them to act as journalists. These guys have some say in what companies live or die. An whether we accept companies doing whatever they want with out private data.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:23 AM on February 14 [6 favorites]

Even where it hits the mark, this strikes me a bit like complaining about the state of journalism in celebrity watching, or the film industry. Don't get me wrong, I really like reading some of this stuff, but I wouldn't call most of it "tech journalism". For the most part, it's just gossip and pontificating, a little vicarious design! or corporate strategy for people to nod or shake their heads along to, and it's usually pretty clear who the current golden children are. I mean, a sizable chunk of the audience is people who call themselves "startup enthusiasts".
posted by intendedeffect at 10:25 AM on February 14

I guess the transparency is an improvement over the same type of stock hucksterism in the 20th century. World's Oldest Profession, etc.
posted by yerfatma at 10:26 AM on February 14

Not sure how Gruber is involved in this microcontretemps, Mr. Bill.

While Gruber is biased, he usually doesn't stoop to Siegler like levels. He also doesn't take money from the companies he's pushing, and if he is, he correctly labels them as ads.

Still, a reminder why I stopped reading techcrunch et al. Too much silicon valley insider BS, too little actual discussion on actual technology. Granted finding a technology site that actual talks about technology versus covering politics/"fucking telephones" is difficult these days. And I never want to see another unboxing as long as I live.
posted by zabuni at 10:27 AM on February 14 [5 favorites]

Yeah, you guys are right. Technology news is really lacking in the technology department.

Some enterprising blogger should start a blog that covers the nuts and bolts of startups, gets in there and digs through the devs github accounts, jumps in and does code reviews.

That would be cool.
posted by Ad hominem at 10:31 AM on February 14 [6 favorites]

I consider Gruber to be funnier, and less childish than the others, but he's still part of that clique in my mind.

Arrington vs. Gruber on TechCrunch TV

Horseshit

One day they're attacking each other over product reviews, the next they're jerking each other off over the chilled shrimp trays at some press junket.
posted by mrbill at 10:33 AM on February 14

Some enterprising blogger should start a blog that covers the nuts and bolts of startups, gets in there and digs through the devs github accounts, jumps in and does code reviews.

If you ever find such a site, post it on Metafilter. I'd love to read it.
posted by zabuni at 10:33 AM on February 14

Its funny I saw this on my twitter feed this AM and read it and for just a moment thought "wow the journalists who cover my business are hopelessly conflicted, but not as bad as these guys are"

And then I read this and realized I was wrong.

What I'm trying to say is that nearly all media is hopelessly conflicted - but you only realize that when you personally have domain knowledge, or someone else with that knowledge points it out to you.
posted by JPD at 10:44 AM on February 14

Lyons should be commended for writing a tell-all about his chosen profession.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 10:55 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]

It's easy to be cynical and roll your eyes at the whole mess. But there's an important difference here.

Arrington and Siegler invest in the industry they blog about.

That's a shocking breach of basic journalistic ethics. This isn't some food journalist disclosing "I own an S&P 500 fund that has some shares in Coca Cola". This is a venture fund whose primary value-add to startups is generating good publicity for them. Lyons may be guilty of some journalistic sins himself, sure, but it's nothing like this.

Then again Arrington doesn't claim to be a journalist. Neither does Siegler (I don't think). They are self-promoting bloggers on their own sites, on TechCrunch, and on PandoDaily. I like some other self-promoting bloggers, including a couple of VC blogs. Sometimes I like what Siegler writes; he can be insightful. The problem with with these guys is a lot of people confuse what they do with journalism and reporting. It's not. Unfortunately the world has to continually be reminded of this.
posted by Nelson at 11:07 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

You know, this kind of thing is endemic with "new media". Just to generalize a bit, the state of play in web-based journalism is that bloggers are expected to write prolifically about many things, most of which they can't possibly understand in any real depth. But since they're writing to people who typically don't understand, either, they're lauded for the superficial strength of their analysis (which, since these guys are usually smart, is at least passably reasonable). Then the lauding goes to their heads and they start to think they're real experts, and then the bullshit really goes into overdrive.

My old field was public policy-related, and policy writing on the web is full of this kind of thing. I used to find writers like Matt Yglesias and Ezra Klein to be reasonably good commentators about political issues, but started to notice that whenever they wrote about something that I happened to know a bit about, they'd get basic facts wrong, make sweeping generalizations, usually rely on first-principles based arguments and generally show that they had absolutely no familiarity with previous work or the actual community of people studying that topic. Then they'd have the arrogance to parachute in and recommend all sorts of sweeping changes to bring this area of policy or that into line with whatever ideal.

But since they don't actually know what they're talking about, they're susceptible to all kinds of inappropriate influence - from personal biases and blind spots and arrogance all the way up to actual conflicts of interest. And it looks much the same in the tech journalism world, where bullshit from paid shills is injected into the discourse and, because no one actually knows what they're talking about, the community is none the wiser.

Yglesias attended his first hockey game last night and, before the second period was up, had already suggested making the puck and the goals bigger. I can take people bullshitting about policy, but once you start spouting off about the most beautiful game on earth, you've crossed a line.
posted by downing street memo at 11:14 AM on February 14 [22 favorites]

Hit men and click whores...

Y'know, I think that's generally "hitmen" and, as in the article itself, "click-whores". At first glance I read Hit and click as verbs and thought the title was suggesting some sort of misanthropic/misogynistic violence, although clicking a whore may actually be some sexual act of which I am unaware.

*sigh* The state of "journalism" and "communication" today...
posted by Shane at 11:15 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]

Gruber just can't write like Arrington and Siegler, is the thing. He's resorted to trite one-liners at the bottom of quotes from other people's blogs, so he's much easier to ignore.
posted by Avenger50 at 11:25 AM on February 14

Nelson: " The problem with with these guys is a lot of people confuse what they do with journalism and reporting. It's not."

Since they've been pretty up-front about their conflict of interest, the problem is no longer with them. The problem is with us, for visiting their websites and driving up their hits and importance. Worse, their most viewed "stories" tend to be mostly content-free gossipy bullshit like the stuff Lyons is talking about (and with which Siegler responded so precisely). We just keep going back for more of it.

If you care about software more than software business, unsubscribe from TechCrunch and read the github feeds instead. You might miss some scoops, but anything really important will turn up elsewhere soon enough.
posted by vanar sena at 11:36 AM on February 14 [2 favorites]

Quality tech journalism exists, it's just not as much drama and empty-calorie entertainment for the non-technical as tech tabloids. And make no mistake, Arrington and Siegler are tabloid journalists at best.
posted by mullingitover at 11:38 AM on February 14

Then again Arrington doesn't claim to be a journalist. Neither does Siegler (I don't think). They are self-promoting bloggers on their own sites, on TechCrunch, and on PandoDaily.

The average person (I would guess) discovers these sites via tech news aggregators, which these guys take great pains to appear on, and which -- one would assume, if one didn't know any better -- link to actual news by actual journalists.

Whether they identify that way or not is immaterial; their sites pretend to offer news, without disclaimer. They could simply inform readers that what they write is entirely opinion-based, but doing so would mean fewer clicks.

Also, you can pretend that they don't "claim to be journalists", but they certainly aren't claiming to be anything else.
posted by coolguymichael at 11:46 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

I agree entirely with vanar sena that it's our own damn fault for reading these clowns. And coolguymichael is right in that Arrington, Siegel, et al definitely blur the lines and are happy to be taken as authoritative reporters as opposed to self-dealing investors.

OTOH Arrington is quite clear on whether he's a journalist when asked directly. After Arrington started CrunchFund the NYT had a story about Arrington's curious role.

“We have a traditional understanding of journalism with the exception of TechCrunch, which is different but is transparent about it.” – Tim Armstrong, AOL CEO.

“I don’t claim to be a journalist,” Mr. Arrington said, though he breaks news and writes prolifically. “I hold myself to higher standards of transparency and disclosure.”

(Look at that! Sourced quotes, on the record, and insightful journalism behind it! I almost forgive you for Judy Miller, NYT.)

Blogs are not a substitute for journalism, but it's going to take years for us to learn that lesson. If journalism survives the transition.
posted by Nelson at 11:55 AM on February 14 [1 favorite]

Gruber just can't write like Arrington and Siegler, is the thing. He's resorted to trite one-liners at the bottom of quotes from other people's blogs, so he's much easier to ignore.

Gruber writes full articles every week or so, and in between, he goes after claim chowder from the blogosphere. He gets ignored because he's usually right, and, let's face it, when Gruber follows up on spurious claims from so-called journalists, that's not only funny, it's a valuable public service. We could use more people like Gruber doing fact-checking of self-described journos.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:03 PM on February 14

We could use more people like Gruber doing fact-checking of self-described journos.

But he prefers one brand of telephones more than other brands of telephones and therefore what he says is invalid!
posted by Threeway Handshake at 12:10 PM on February 14 [1 favorite]

had already suggested making the puck and the goals bigger

At least he didn't suggest either -- or both -- of them should glow...
posted by Dark Messiah at 12:13 PM on February 14

The thing is... the stuff they blog about isn't even that interesting. Okay some new social network for iPhones. Who cares? I don't get why people even have that much interest in these things. They're all pretty boring at this point. None of them offer anything that isn't offered by other products, and they seem to be all games/mindless entertainment. Like Path is just entertainment, that social network that 'color' social network was just entertainment/distraction. AirBnB got a ton of press in the 'tech press' but what they did had nothing to do with 'technology' it was just a clever business model that happened to use 'tech' in the most simple way. Same thing with groupon.

You read these blogs, you're not learning about new ways to do things, or new technological advances, you're just learning about new ways for rich people to entertain themselves with expensive toys that are really just high-tech versions of the gameboy. (and the popular 'tech blogs' are just a silicon valley clique's version of Nintendo Power)

So all of this has an aura of just not mattering at all. All this is really just about diversions and distractions. No different then TV shows or video games. Or if it's not about consensual distraction, then it's about advertising which just about non-consensual distraction.

The 'journalism' about this stuff is interesting because people make money, and people making money is always entertaining. Back in the 90s I used to read wired then Slashdot and there was this feeling that people were building the future. Now it seems like the future is already built and people are just playing around. But they're not going anywhere. Path, and Color aren't 'the future' they're just bets about how people are going to entertain themselves over the next few months/years. I don't know if that's a real change of it's just that I was naive at the time.

And of course it all seems like an incestuous circlejerk anyway. Tech journalism is as much about the 'personalities' of tech journalism as it is about tech. Which makes it ridiculously boring because all of those 'personalities' are boring people who talk about boring stuff (like the aforementioned path/color/airbnb/groupon/etc)

---

The same Dan Lyon who created a mock blog ridiculing a CEO who then went on to perform one of the greatest corporate turnarounds history?

Yes, because successful CEOs should be UNMOCKABLE people. Where is your respect for your betters!? Successful CEOs are gods among men and you should be PROSTRATING YOURSELVES before them.

Anything less is blasphemy!!!

---

It's a slam against AOL. Some backstory.

From the article:

(Full disclosure: My wife helped out with one of the events that Calacanis put on after he broke with TechCrunch. And I'm a tech blogger myself, sometimes writing about the same topics covered on TechCrunch — although my site, Technologizer, is gnat-sized by comparison.) (See The 50 Best Websites of 2011.)

Looks at byline:

Thursday, Sep. 08, 2011
The TechCrunch Crack-Up: Unfortunate and Inevitable
By Harry McCracken

Heh. I just like the fact that by some bizarre turn of events "Harry McCraken" has a byline in Time Magazine. Lol.

(does some googling)

Wait... that's his real name? Seriously? His name is like a combo of "Harry Balls" and "Phil McCrackin"
---

Y'know, I think that's generally "hitmen" and, as in the article itself, "click-whores". At first glance I read Hit and click as verbs and thought the title was suggesting some sort of misanthropic/misogynistic violence, although clicking a whore may actually be some sexual act of which I am unaware.

Yeah I read the first two sentences and immediately my mind turned to 'cow clicker' type 'social' 'games'. I imagined someone had come up with a 'whore clicker' game, and one where you clicked on dudes but it was like you were smacking them.
posted by delmoi at 12:19 PM on February 14 [3 favorites]

I'd never heard of MG Siegler (except maybe seeing his name in passing). But now I know who he is and I just came across this meme
posted by delmoi at 1:17 PM on February 14

But now I know who he is and I just came across this meme

Ditto.

I guest blogged for Vallywag years ago, and I will never get the smell out.
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 1:34 PM on February 14

The same Dan Lyon who created a mock blog ridiculing a CEO ...

Did you ever read FakeSteveJobs? It was hardly ridicule, more like a caricature. A lot of it was very pro-Apple, but just done in a fun way.
posted by memebake at 3:33 PM on February 14

Did you ever read FakeSteveJobs? It was hardly ridicule, more like a caricature. A lot of it was very pro-Apple, but just done in a fun way.

FSJ only really worked as a joke for people who know a lot about ActualSteveJobs (mostly Apple/anti-Apple partisans). It's inherently reliant on people's intense relationship with the company.
posted by jaduncan at 3:57 PM on February 14

There are still plenty of Hit Men in the record industry.
posted by box at 5:26 PM on February 14

I imagined someone had come up with a 'whore clicker' game, and one where you clicked on dudes but it was like you were smacking them.

Out now, the two most significant game publishers of our time release their first-ever collaboration. From Rockstar and Zynga: Click Whore Hit Men. Play it on Facebook today!
posted by box at 5:29 PM on February 14 [2 favorites]

Was this basically Esther Dyson's routine in the 90's? Back then I could never wrap my head around why anyone cared what she had to say.
posted by NortonDC at 8:49 PM on February 14 [3 favorites]