Leo Laporte lays down the law.

June 8, 2009 11:36 PM

Mike Arrington and Leo Laporte have some passionate words for each other. Mike apologizes, and Leo accepts. This is not the first time someone has been angry at Mike.
posted by bigmusic (42 comments total)

I find the idea of grown men getting angry at each other about which toys are cooler pretty hilarious.

Or in this case debating the 'ethics' of the process used to determine which toys are the coolest, which is in some sense even lamer.
posted by delmoi at 11:45 PM on June 8, 2009 [4 favorites]

What's weird about Arrington's criticism is that he often invests in a startup, then 'reviews' that same startup without ever disclosing his investment. Yet here he feels comfortable claiming there is a conflict of interest when a reviewer reviews a product prior to its official release date.
posted by mulligan at 11:48 PM on June 8, 2009 [3 favorites]

Leo is known for, and quite adamant about, buying the products he talks about. He's a stickler about it. He is quoted to that effect in the comments on Techcrunch here.

Or in this case debating the 'ethics' of the process used to determine which toys are the coolest, which is in some sense even lamer.

Well, no, it isn't. Tech journalism may be a bastard stepchild of journalism writ large, but one of the most important discussions of our times is about the ethics of journalism. This kind of issue certainly isn't as important as gay prostitute faux-journalist plants in the White House press room (or whatever the heck happened there), but it's of a piece with it.

I don't know. I have listened to several of Leo's podcasts for literally years, and I am fond of him, so I'm perhaps biased. Over the years, I've heard nothing ill said about him, and more than a little unfavorable internet opining about Mike Arrington, and the recent kerfuffle with his seemingly-unsubstantiated claims about Lastfm disincline me from being too sympathetic. But I haven't met either man, so it's all just more Important Internet Opinions from me.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:20 AM on June 9, 2009 [7 favorites]

At least it wasn't an iPhone.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 12:39 AM on June 9, 2009

Or Twitter, god forbid!
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 12:50 AM on June 9, 2009

It's obvious that the real reason for Arrington's asshat behavior was because he's jealous that he wasn't cool enough to get to play with the Pre. Note that he has this massive complex that TechCrunch isn't "real journalism", and not getting a demo model I suspect to him, is a message from Palm that he isn't a "journalist". In any event, seeing that he couldn't play with the toy, he decided to fuck with the kid that had one. Children like that shouldn't be trusted with nice toys anyways.

Christ, what an asshole.
posted by amuseDetachment at 1:42 AM on June 9, 2009

Mike Arrington: At least he's not as bad as Dave Winer
posted by blasdelf at 2:06 AM on June 9, 2009 [11 favorites]

Arrington's apology was couched in a lot of defensive justification. LaPorte seems like one of the nicest guys in tech podcasting, so it's surprising to see him angry like that.
posted by zardoz at 2:52 AM on June 9, 2009

Well, no, it isn't. Tech journalism may be a bastard stepchild of journalism writ large, but one of the most important discussions of our times is about the ethics of journalism.

I disagree. I think criticism should be neutral for things which are artistic endeavors like movies, books, and even video games. And something where you have a significant investment like a car. But cellphone handsets? Come on. I think that the product space is to trivial to be covered by 'journalists'. If someone has some journalistic chops, they ought to do something worthwhile with it.
posted by delmoi at 3:44 AM on June 9, 2009

Fuck it! We'll do it live!
posted by uncanny hengeman at 4:39 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]

That was a primary school level rant. “Screw you.” [repeat x lots]

“He is the most [hmm, what's a synonym for troll? I've already said troll. Quick. Think, dammit!] ahh... trollish person I've ever worked with.”

It's obvious that the real reason for Arrington's asshat behavior was because he's jealous that he wasn't cool enough to get to play with the Pre.

I don’t know any of these gents or their “priors,” but was he wearing a shit eating smirk when that unfolded? I initially thought he was just yanking the other fella’s chain. There’s a time and a place – not saying it was good form or anything.
posted by uncanny hengeman at 4:49 AM on June 9, 2009

@delmoi : How can criticism be neutral? I can understand that criticism should be unbiased (and that's the point that Arrington was trying to make) but what does it mean for criticism to be neutral?
posted by sexymofo at 4:51 AM on June 9, 2009

The remix with keyboard cat (in the sidebar) is much better.
posted by Pliskie at 5:02 AM on June 9, 2009

Keyboard cat, play them out.
posted by not_on_display at 5:07 AM on June 9, 2009

...play them me out.
posted by not_on_display at 5:08 AM on June 9, 2009

But cellphone handsets? Come on.

Distinction without a difference.

If someone has some journalistic chops, they ought to do something worthwhile with it.

By whose definition? Yours? I don't think spending my life reviewing tech gadgets would be very rewarding either, for what little it's worth, but unlike you, I'm disinclined to pee on people from a great height if that's what they like doing or find fulfilling or remunerative. The principle remains the same: whatever you do, even if other people find it worthless, it is better to do it ethically. I don't think there's much to disagree with, there.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 5:10 AM on June 9, 2009 [8 favorites]

So, wait. Which one am I supposed to buy?
posted by backseatpilot at 5:19 AM on June 9, 2009

Jesus. I'm slow to pick up memes, but does this TechCrunch bullshit have any credibility anywhere?

Between this and the fake last.fm "expose" -- if you can call it that -- I want to believe TechCrunch is run by a couple of 15 year olds as an afterschool hobby, not by adults.
posted by cavalier at 5:29 AM on June 9, 2009

It's obvious that the real reason for Arrington's asshat behavior was because he's jealous that he wasn't cool enough to get to play with the Pre.

I've been a critic of Arrington, but I don't buy that. Arrington was setting up a discussion on how Palm has begun denying early review access to publications and sites who have been critical of its products, including TechCrunch. If the discussion hadn't been cut off by Laporte flipping out, that's where Arrington was going.

I'm surprised that Laporte would take such offense to being questioned about loaners and review ethics. Tech journalism is rotten with examples of companies getting favorable press by "loaning" products they never ask to get back. Although Laporte may have always demonstrated sterling ethics, he ought to anticipate the issue coming up.
posted by rcade at 5:29 AM on June 9, 2009

I suspect to him, is a message from Palm that he isn't a "journalist"
He isn't a journalist. His defence of the whole last.fm thing amounted to "getting it right is expensive, getting it first is free". He avoids all notion of journalistic ethics, until he's piqued at not getting the privileges accorded to journalists and then suddenly conflict-of-interest becomes his issue of the day.

Apparently he got death threats over this. That's not acceptable, but if it's a 14-year-old's way of saying "ffs, just go away you incendiary and vexing troll of a man", I understand completely.
posted by fightorflight at 5:32 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]

By whose definition? Yours?

Yeah mine, who else? I don't exactly see why I shouldn't pass judgment on people who are unable to have an appropriate perspective on what matters and what doesn't. One of those things: the subjective differences between various cellphones. Sundry gizmos. Whatever. I realize that the smart phones, overall, have a lot of potential, but I don't think the differences between them are all that great.
posted by delmoi at 6:02 AM on June 9, 2009

I met Mike Arrington once at an O'Reilly event. I was standing with a group of about a half-dozen people, including Arrington, discussing something geeky and trivial. I asked a question of someone else in the group, and as he began to answer Arrington interrupted, turned to me, and asked, "wait, who are you?" I told him my name, to which he answered "never heard of you" and promptly changed the subject.

Yes, "the plural of anecdote is not data," but I have no trouble whatsoever believing that Arrington is just a simple asshole.
posted by jacobian at 6:10 AM on June 9, 2009 [16 favorites]

does this TechCrunch bullshit have any credibility anywhere?

No, not really. They publish some entertaining rumours on occasion, some of which happen to be true. And sometimes they have some decent insight into companies. But it's all wasted by their contempt for journalistic ethics and practice.
posted by Nelson at 6:16 AM on June 9, 2009

But cellphone handsets? Come on. I think that the product space is to trivial to be covered by 'journalists'.

Cellphones are part of a technological progression that dictates the future of the entire human race. The differences between them may be subtle, but they are significant to issues of policy and infrastructure, and how people perceive ownership of their personal technology and the information they create and consume. It's actually more important than any work of art in recent history.
posted by 0xdeadc0de at 6:39 AM on June 9, 2009 [5 favorites]

I think the bigger issue here is not so much whether cell phone handsets are important to cover, it's that Arrington questioned Laporte's integrity. Integrity is one of the most important things a media commentator and host like Laporte has - it's his lifeblood, really. Think about it. The man makes his living based on the fact that people trust, respect, and like him. If people don't believe that he's a trustworthy, respectable, likable individual, his credibility is shot and people will stop downloading his podcasts/listening to his radio show/etc.

Put it to you another way - if I came into your place of employment and started questioning your integrity and credibility in front of your boss/coworkers/customers, would you much care for it?

So, while I think Laporte overreacted a bit (and clearly in the manner of a man who is not used to getting angry) I totally understand where he's coming from. Especially given everything else I've been hearing about this Arrington guy.
posted by HostBryan at 6:55 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]

Leo's cool. Arrington's a dick.
posted by condour75 at 7:18 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]

Arrington is a master at being a bully and an outright jerk, and then assuming a defensive, thumb-sucking posture when he's attacked for it. For me the most poetically just moment of his 'pro-blogger' career comes from his own account of being spit on in Germany last year:

...in Munich, Germany someone walked up to me and quite deliberately spat in my face...People around me stared, then looked away and continued their conversations.

That nobody came over to give support after such a base insult, that people stared, looked away and kept chatting speaks volumes to the quality of his social capital: it's toxic.
posted by holycola at 7:38 AM on June 9, 2009

I really thought that the opinions of the MeFites would be a lot more varied. I respect this community greatly, and have always enjoyed lurking here and seeing how well-reasoned some of the discussions are.

Mike Arrington, in my opinion, is not only one of the hardest working people in Silicon Valley, but his articles are nearly always well-researched, well written, and incredibly insightful. I live in MN, so I don't know anyone from Silicon Valley personally, but I suspect that Arrington's dickish demeanor comes from just being one of the hardest workers in the industry.

And regarding the chip on his shoulder about not TechCrunch not being treated like journalism, I wholeheartedly agree with him. The industry of journalism is changing, and everyone is trying to establish new rules about whether a blog can be journalism. Again, this is just my opinion, but I think TechCrunch is proof positive that not only can journalism be done by newspaper/TV/radio outsiders, but it can be compelling, entertaining, and profitable.

Arrington might be a dick, but he would certainly seem to warrant a little more praise than he's been seeing here.
posted by AbnerDoon at 7:44 AM on June 9, 2009

Play him off, keyboard cat
posted by empath at 7:46 AM on June 9, 2009

@AbnerDoon, re: this comment:

"The industry of journalism is changing, and everyone is trying to establish new rules about whether a blog can be journalism. Again, this is just my opinion, but I think TechCrunch is proof positive that not only can journalism be done by newspaper/TV/radio outsiders, but it can be compelling, entertaining, and profitable."

Compelling, entertaining and profitable are "part of this complete breakfast" when it comes to quality journalism. The missing part -- the nourishing part -- is ACCURACY.

From the New York Times

TechCrunch, with about five million monthly visitors, dominates rival blogs, which Mr. Arrington disparages. (And they do the same to his.) But he doesn’t think of sites like Gawker or All Things Digital as competitors. He has his eyes set on The Wall Street Journal and The New York Times. (And he disparages both.)

That drive to compete with the so-called mainstream media is what’s behind his strategy. He doesn’t have the luxury of a large staff to confirm everything, so he competes where he has the advantage. “Getting it right is expensive,” he says. “Getting it first is cheap.”

It seems to me that Arrington wants all the credibility, privileges and power of *real* journalism, but doesn't want to accept any of the pesky responsibility that goes along with it. I do agree with one thing, though: getting it first (and wrong) is cheap.
posted by chinese_fashion at 8:06 AM on June 9, 2009 [3 favorites]

while I think Laporte overreacted a bit (and clearly in the manner of a man who is not used to getting angry

That was a primary school level rant. “Screw you.” [repeat x lots]

keep in mind that as Leo broadcasts the majority (if not all) of his content live over the internet, and strives to keep his content family-friendly, his repeated use of "screw you" was probably in effort of trying to save the broadcast / not sully his otherwise "clean" reputation.

As for Leo's overreaction, I think it boils down to Arrington (who has zero journalistic credibility himself) having the temerity to question someone else's journalistic integrity (upon which Leo is nigh-on unassailable).
posted by namewithoutwords at 8:12 AM on June 9, 2009

I imagine this was just the steam valve letting off some pressure that had been building in LaPorte for a while towards Arrington. The actual conversation wasn't that bad, but it was the straw on the camels exercise ball.
posted by blue_beetle at 8:27 AM on June 9, 2009

The industry of journalism is changing, and everyone is trying to establish new rules about whether a blog can be journalism.

There's no reason a blog can't be journalism. But there's certainly no reason a blog is automatically journalism just because the writer desperately claims it is, especially when their major trade is in rumours rather than research and investigation. The whole thing smacks of nothing more than bitterness over not receiving free stuff.

I don't see much value in these sort of targeted, pre-release reviews anyway. It's better to wait for real people (those famed "early adopters") to get their hands on it for a few months, wait for them to bitch about it, then decide if you want the product after a bug-fix and update cycle or two.
posted by Jimbob at 8:52 AM on June 9, 2009

Yeah mine, who else? I don't exactly see why I shouldn't pass judgment on people who are unable to have an appropriate perspective on what matters and what doesn't. One of those things: the subjective differences between various cellphones. Sundry gizmos. Whatever. I realize that the smart phones, overall, have a lot of potential, but I don't think the differences between them are all that great.

I agree with you to a point, however, there are over 4 billion cell phone users worldwide. Seeing as how there are more people on earth with cell phone access than clean water access, let them banter all they want. Personally, I'll be watching the other channel where they banter about why it is they can string the infrastructure for cell coverage for every slumdog in Dhaka and bushman in the Kalahari but can't lay the pipes for clean water.

What is the !Kung term for # anyway?
posted by Pollomacho at 8:53 AM on June 9, 2009 [1 favorite]

but his articles are nearly always well-researched, well written, and incredibly insightful

No, they're written as if they're well-researched, but they aren't. He admits as much himself -- his focus is on being first, not being right.

Speaking with an authoritative tone of voice is not the same thing as being authoritative.
posted by fightorflight at 9:56 AM on June 9, 2009

The Gilmor Gang is always a clusterf and I'm not sure why. You would think he would know that once the swears fly that Leo is serious.
posted by ALongDecember at 12:32 PM on June 9, 2009

...I suspect that Arrington's dickish demeanor comes from just being one of the hardest workers in the industry.

Oh, well, if he's hard working, then I guess that excuses him from being a total douchebag. 'Cause it's impossible, of course, to be hard working and kind and friendly. A variant of the "I'm from New York" defense.
posted by zardoz at 4:58 PM on June 9, 2009

I agree with you to a point, however, there are over 4 billion cell phone users worldwide. Seeing as how there are more people on earth with cell phone access than clean water access, let them banter all they want. Personally, I'll be watching the other channel where they banter about why it is they can string the infrastructure for cell coverage for every slumdog in Dhaka and bushman in the Kalahari but can't lay the pipes for clean water.

I agree that cellphones are a great thing, but the idea of grown men and women getting all huffy and angry about which phone is better when they have the same basic features is what I find absurd.
posted by delmoi at 11:43 PM on June 9, 2009

I agree that cellphones sports/Roman games/tv show/computers/shoes/anything else people like to make comparisons about are a great thing, but the idea of grown men and women getting all huffy and angry about which phone sports team/gladiator/tv show/computer/shoe/ad nauseum is better when they have the same basic features is what I find absurd.

People do this kind of thing all the time. If you turn on your radio or tv right this moment, where ever you are in the world, there is most likely some man or woman getting all huffy about a specific sports team, politician, product, whatever that is essentially and in the grand picture just like all the rest in its class and nonessential to life on earth. Cellphones are no exception.
posted by Pollomacho at 8:03 AM on June 10, 2009 [1 favorite]

I agree that cellphones are a great thing, but the idea of grown men and women getting all huffy and angry about which phone is better when they have the same basic features is what I find absurd.

Yes, I too find people getting huffy and using terms like "slave" about minor features like MP3 ringtones absurd.
posted by fightorflight at 8:13 AM on June 10, 2009

Oh, as they say, snap.
posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 10:19 PM on June 10, 2009

And Nick Cave sings to me and it seems germane

Back on the street I saw a great big smiling sun
It was a good day and an evil day and all was bright and new
And it seemed to me that most destruction was being done
By those who could not choose between the two

Amateurs, dilettantes, hacks, cowboys, clones
The streets groan with little Caesars, Napoleons and cunts
With their building blocks and their tiny plastic phones
Counting on their fingers, with crumbs down their fronts.

posted by stavrosthewonderchicken at 6:02 AM on June 12, 2009