michael-arrington-techcrunch-crunchfund

The blurring line between venture capitalists and journalists in Silicon Valley has pundits debating the ethics of mixing money and media.

Newsweek’s Dan Lyons took aim and fired at CrunchFund yesterday, exposing unresolved issues about journalism, ethics and the nature of influence in the Silicon Valley tech world.

In an inflammatory blog post, Hit men, click whores, and paid apologists: Welcome to the Silicon Cesspool, Lyons waged war on the early stage venture capital firm founded by TechCrunch’s Michael Arrington and MG Siegler, and critiqued former tech bloggers who use their influence to make “gobs of money” through investment in early stage startups.

Many prominent tech journalists have subsequently taken sides. Quentin Hardy, deputy tech editor at The New York Times; and Kara Swisher, co-executive editor of AllThingsd, both issued positive commentary on Lyons’ post.

The controversy was initially sparked last week when Nick Bilton criticized the social networking startup Path, which had uploaded users’ address books from their iPhones. Siegler published a response on his personal blog, stating that Bilton was “way off base,” and critiqued tech journalists for publishing stories with “little or no research.”

In defense of Bilton, Lyons made the claim that Siegler and Arrington had attempted to discredit the New York Times’ reporter in order to safeguard the reputation of Path, a portfolio company.

In an attempt to settle the debate, Arrington defended Siegler on his blog, Uncrunched, and called for an armistice in battle of the bloggers. “Most journalists don’t like other journalists much, but when the whole group is attacked as a whole they galvanize quickly.”

As the dust settles, unresolved questions about the future of tech blogs will remain. The vestiges of the battle still wage on Twitter; some users have firmly taken sides, while others call for the implementation of hard and fast ethics in journalism. Where do you stand?

Showing 4 comments

  1. Mike Dunn at 10:47am 14th February 2012 Such a messy situation. It's hard not to worry about the ethics of Arrington blogging about the same industry he invests in. That being said Arrington is often the first person to point out problems with companies that he invests in. I think the point that is getting passed over in this whole debate is why is Apple allowing apps to gather this information without users knowing. The spotlight is on Path, when it should be shared with Apple and other companies that gather that information.
    1. TechFreak at 11:29am 14th February 2012 Arrington is an idiot. He has diarrhea of the mouth. He claims to be a journalist one day when it benefits him, and not a journalist the next. Of course he is going to defend Path, he's an investor. And just because Arrington claims to be "transparent" in that he discloses he is an investor, doesn't make it right. Path did the wrong thing. Don't blame Apple for being a platform, blame the developer for knowingly doing this.
      1. Mike Dunn at 11:31am 14th February 2012 Oh, Path is clearly wrong for collecting information. I'm just saying that there is no doubt countless other apps and companies that do the same exact same thing, but no one is talking about them.
        1. Ian Bell at 11:51am 14th February 2012 Because we don't know about them yet. :)Simple as that.
Close Suggestion BAE Systems reveal the battery tech powering the Lola electric racecar, and its possible future uses
View Article