A VC - Latest Comments in Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Adrian Palacios — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 11:04:23 -0000

Thanks :-)
Maybe the next generation (those who have grown up on Facebook, blogs, etc) will recognize this? Specifically, that recent does not equal relevant. Maybe our belief in being "first" comes from all those years of TV nightly news and print media positioning themselves as *the* source for breaking news. Hopefully that concept will become obsolete.
So how do we position bloggers? Is there a measurement outside of Edelman's Social Media Index that rewards bloggers not through volume of posts, overall online activity, feed subscribers, etc., but by the fact that they do their research, post relevant news backed with insightful opinion? Or is there some Darwinian survival of the fittest at work that will weed out the weak?

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

bernardlunn — Sat, 07 Mar 2009 11:50:55 -0000

Being misquoted by the media is as old as Gutenberg. This is nothing to do with old or new media. People will - over time - gravitate more to sources that they trust because on balance they believe them to be more accurate. You can make money at both ends - National Enquirer makes money and so does Economist. Storm in a tea cup

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Steve Kane — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 18:06:39 -0000

hi seth. how would google determine a blog's "reputation" (in order to, in your words, "consider it news")?

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Steve Kane — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:48:03 -0000

The first rule of professional journalism -- get out of your chair and out of your office and out of your building and out of your head and try like heck to see the world/news/story first hand and try like heck to report both facts and spin but try like heck to distinguish between the two

And btw, to heck with tech news and blogging -- we have a deadly serious crisis on our hands, a massive sea change in the role of media in our culture and local affairs that is terrifying (to those who care about democracy and civil liberties anyway):

http://bit.ly/davidsimon

Sigh.

As Roger Waters said,

"We are entertaining ourselves to death."

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Steve Kane — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:44:09 -0000

Hi Dave

So... two wrongs make a right?

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Steve Kane — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 17:43:06 -0000

c'mon bijan, we all know that the "best" rarely if ever wins out -- its the juiciest and slickest or fastest who get the attention

WSJ is perceived as dying but CNBC is a rising star

Washington Post is dead trees but Huffington Post and Drudge Report are rocket ships

http://bit.ly/davidsimon

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

JanDawson — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 16:12:21 -0000

But the source was the slide deck - not Fred. Even if you used the rest of the deck as context it didn't help overcome the obvious conclusion you'd draw from that slide. If Fred's going to post the deck without commentary then he can't complain when people take it at face value. The point Fred is making is very valid when bloggers write stories about rumors or things they overheard or surmised from other data - not so much when the post is based on public domain information that seems to be self-contained.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Dorian Benkoil — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:49:59 -0000

On the point about TV networks being so reluctant:

Hulu seems anything but reluctant. They've made it easy to use, and have a fair number of ads. Many folks I know -- including some codgers in YMCA gym I go to (they're anything but cutting edge geeks) -- watch a lot of their TV from Hulu. If Hulu's TV network masters were reluctant, why would they make it so easy?

ABC, too, has made a lot of its programs freely and ever more easily available.

Networks seem much less grudging than they were (and I say this as someone who was the founding international producer, then managing producer at ABCNEWS.com, and attended a lot of difficult meetings about digital with ABC and Disney execs.)

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Dorian Benkoil — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 14:39:08 -0000

I like this point, brandingme. Being first is taken as an end in itself, but being more accurate, more thoughtful, even more analytical over time can add much more. I bemoan that so much of our media consumption is based on chronology -- we tend to see, in our feeds, text messages, etc, what's most recent, not necessarily most relevant.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

fredwilson — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:54:58 -0000

harrison, as long as we are now talking, i am the founder and managing partner of Union Square Ventures. i guess you could call me an investment analyst too, but that's not my title.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

fredwilson — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:43:17 -0000

This turned into a conversation as well and a good one.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

fredwilson — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:41:14 -0000

Ken, it was worth it because there a bunch of bloggers who know I'd like to
be contacted and they also now know how to contact me

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

fredwilson — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:39:12 -0000

great use of video reply harrison. shoot me an email and i'll intro you to my ass't who can always get a message to me (but can't solve the 2am blog post issue!)

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

fredwilson — Thu, 05 Mar 2009 08:36:13 -0000

You gave me a chuckle with that comment JLM

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

StevenHodson — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:24:08 -0000

they can if they want to but with the majority of bloggers the chances are they've gotten the brush off or some non-committal piece of crap that they have given up on trying. We aren't all Fred Wilson or Kara Swisher or Robert Scoble.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

StevenHodson — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:21:07 -0000

I pretty well said the same thing in a post today about this. Where Kara et al will usually get the prez of a company on first ring the rest of us are lucky if we don't get the cold shoulder from some secretary of a junior assistance VP of PR.

That doesn't mean I don't agree with Fred in principal - it is just in the real world of blogging it doesn't work that way.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

StevenHodson — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:18:13 -0000

I agree with that totally

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Michael Masnick — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:17:04 -0000

Fred, this seems to contradict what you said just last week about the blog being a conversation:

http://www.avc.com/a_vc/200...

In fact, I wrote something about your earlier post here, where I talk about why I don't necessarily want to check with the source first. I'd rather that be a part of the public conversation. That way everyone benefits:

http://techdirt.com/article...

I recognize the different viewpoints... but it does seem like the two concepts contradict slightly.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

ChangeForge | Ken Stewart — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 22:07:57 -0000

This has been a rather interesting debate that has unfolded... I can see both sides quite crisply from my vantage - and concur that the slides could've been more clearly stated, but request for comment might have also been appropriate.

I suppose it goes back to the intent and tone of the post and whether it was intended to be more news or conversational. I do not pretend to know the underlying motivations behind the author, Eric, but I do think the reaction was a bit harsh here.

To Dave's point(s) many blog posts are very editorial in nature, and as such express conjecture and opinion. I most certainly understood this when I engaged in reading the article and did not jump to any crazy conclusions that you, Fred, had solely endorsed the jump from speculation to fact. Quite the opposite, actually.

To some extent, I wonder if you do not give the readers credit for being able to read between the lines and take responsibility as readers. If this is the case, and I would argue that your position could be logically extended to this level, then in point of fact, Eric was a reader of your slides and you could've (not necessarily should've) allowed this jump in logic to be not only possible but quite possible.

As indicated by Louis, speculation around the monetization of Twitter runs high. I don't pretend to understand the fascination from the general populace, but do understand your keen interest in such things given your level of involvement, and can likewise understand your aggravation at possible linkage being made.

However, I do intend to point out that a notable name such as yourself does appear to be a little removed from the reach of the average blogger, but I can say I also appreciate your comment and adjustment of "tone" in a reply comment to Dave.

I must say this is all very dramatic, and wonder if in the end it was all really worth it. However, as one who thoroughly enjoys extending the conversation - you most certainly have offered a rich buffet of "freedom of speech" and "journalist integrity" issues in the comments of your blog.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Harrison Hoffman — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 19:40:57 -0000

Talking to the source

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

Paul Johnson — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 18:01:41 -0000

Fred - agreed. As the new media continues to evolve, some of the guiding principles of journalism need to be adopted. Most bloggers are very good at this, so there's hope.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

JLM — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 17:07:45 -0000

Interesting issue.

First, you are paying the price for being famous --- perhaps because of your direct connection to Twitter. The higher you climb on the totem pole, the more of your ass the world can see. [I just hope you have paid your taxes and have no illegal nannies.]

Second, you personally have a very high quality blog and therefore you are attributing your standards to others. Always a fatal error. Because you deal w/ OPM you also have some ethical restraint.

Last, the state of the flow of information is pretty damn clear --- volume is increasing, speed is increasing, clarity is decreasing and integrity has evaporated. This is true of every aspect of communication/information across the entire spectrum. The blogosphere (a word I truly hate) is even worse because it clearly is not journalism and journalism itself is no longer journalism. It is however clearly commentary and commentary is still trying to pose as journalism.

I have heard it said: "What's the difference between a girlfriend and a hooker?" Packaging, branding and pricing. Apologies to all girlfriends and hookers! Mea culpa!

Same problem w/ journalism and commentary and the blogosphere.

The old adage "Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear." is quite analagous today.

Last comment: The law of unintended consequences is at an all time high just now. Post something somewhere and you never know who reads it and how it is used.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

GlennKelman — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 15:40:47 -0000

More people than ever are reading technology news, but the quality has, for the first time in my memory, palpably declined, even at newspapers which now no longer have the resources to interview, edit and fact-check as carefully as they once did.

I would certainly pay for quality; I just wish someone would ask me to...

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

kidmercury — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:52:19 -0000

technology journalists need to talk about google censorship of 9/11 truth, data snooping, and that type of stuff.

the self-censorship has to end. it's essential to getting through this political/economic crisis.

Re: Suggestion: Talk To The Source

rick gregory — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 14:31:00 -0000

That can be very hard. Quick, what's the content here? Slide 22? The entire deck? The deck with audio of the presentation?

It's very very easy to grab a piece of information out of context either deliberately or just because it catches their eye. That doesn't excuse the reporter from actually doing what reporters usually do and checking sources, etc.