Is this comment sexist?
Shelley, Lane’s attorney is abusing the DMCA for his/her own goals. And copyright has nothing to do with “giving credit.” It has to do with being forced to license work unless it falls under fair use, which this clearly does.
Mathew is right, you are wrong. But since Lane is a woman, it really doesn’t matter what she did as far as you are concerned. She’s a woman, so she’s right.
The “Shelley” in this post is a person who trolls TechCrunch about once per week accusing me of all sort of things, very often of being sexist. In my opinion she shifts her opinions regularly on issues to ensure that she supports the woman in any dispute. This particular exchange is around photographer Lane Hartwell taking down the web 2.0 bubble video, and I asked myself, what would Shelley’s position on this be if it was me who took the picture and issued the DMCA notice? She would have exactly the opposite opinion.
Anyway, A train wreck is about to happen and we can all watch it. Valleywag has already chimed in, but they didn’t get the real story. Eric Rice has now compared me to Don Imus in this video and is organizing people to go after TechCrunch sponsors on Twitter.
When this kind of thing gets rolling, there’s no stopping or controlling it. This is going to be highly entertaining for everyone to watch except me, and it’ll make Eric a very popular guy.
Tin hat on Michael…
What is funny is that in his video he acts like it’s some big thing to attack you and that no one ever does it because they are scared of you. When I read TechCrunch it’s pretty clear that you get savaged in almost every post. He thinks he’s David to your Goliath, but in reality he’s just using this one dumb comment you made to make himself famous. You’re a jerk, Mike, but so is he.
Heh, anon, you don’t count. Call me an asshole, too, I could honestly give a shit.
Thanks for taking the first move, Mike. So, simple questions, is the kind of sexist comment (and disrespectful comment that was subsequently posted to Mathew’s civilized request) appropriate for someone with a responsibility and meh, ok, I’ll pander, ‘leadership’ role/large footprint in this community.
2. Why does it appear that the posting of the Loren video was not a newsworthy thing, but rather, a conflict of interest thing (you said you were an investor), in an era of the controversy brings the links in?
As a clarifier, one thing I want to make aware to social media types is in an era of things like the Imus thing, that’s this Great Unreachable when people want to protest or boycott and such. I’m not much of an activists, and boycotts are somewhat silly, but it’s worthy of asking since we’re in a space where bringing things up to sponsors is far more attainable, far more real, and far more immediate.
Anon, you still don’t count. Sayin’.
Cheers.
It was a stupid, sexist comment, and the justifications for posting it made in the same thread (e.g. “I’ll do whatever the fuck I feel like”, calling “Shelley” a fascist, accusing Mathew of sucking up for even suggesting you were out of order) were even more stupid.
The way one stops or controls these things is to appreciate the problem and apologise.
Eric
You spent the whole day worrying about this?
Man, just unsubscribe, change the channel
Leaders are choosen by the populus,they rarely put themselves forward,I would rather Mike call me an asshole and Loren call me a big headed Irish mick than have you do this police state crap. You dont speak for me, you speak for you.
Nice seemic though.
I’m not getting involved with any kind of anti-TC sponsor movement or picking up torches and pitchforks for anybody else’s cause here (Rice, Powers, whomever), but it doesn’t matter what Shelley is saying when looking at your responses. Mike, your comment was wrong. Come on, you don’t need to poll people here to ask, do you? Seriously?
Hopefully readers here will follow along with what you wrote when Mathew politely asked you not to go there (to the “since she’s a woman” garbage). Clearly a taste of a little FU money is not helping your humility or civility.
Ordinal – I didn’t call Shelley a fascist. And calling someone a sexist in today’s world is not quite, but almost, as career wrecking as calling them a racist. Given Shelley’s history, and the simple fact that I am in no way sexist (my CEO, who I hired, is a woman for God’s sake), I would have hoped that people wouldn’t be attacking me like this.
This is, very probably, the end of me writing on techcrunch.
While not sexist, your comment on Mathew Ingram’s blog was out of context and it’s hardly reasonable to expect everyone else to put the pieces together. Safe to say you were always going to get a reaction.
Eric Rice’s seesmic post is priggish at best, hopelessly self indulgent at worst. Apparently you’re tarred with the same brush: controversy for clicks.
TDavid – I didn’t see Mathew’s response as polite, I saw it as condescending and censoring. Thus my FU.
Was the comment smart? No. Was it what I was realy thinking? yes. Frankly, I’ve been a very down from the blognation shuttering (lots of attacks saying the closing was my fault), and I let my guard down. But it doesn’t really matter what I think or do, the accusation is terrifying and chilling. This party is over.
“Shelley is and always has been a fascist around these issues.” – yes, I suppose that one could say that that was not implying that someone was a fascist per se, but just calling them a fascist around “these issues” i.e. in the current context. I am not that interested in that one point; it is not really necessary to get into a lengthy argument about it. It’s not like there isn’t anything else here.
Mike, I am afraid that my reaction to your complaints that being tagged as “sexist” is career-wrecking is “tough beans”. Instead of saying “this person regularly trolls me and therefore cannot be trusted” you chose to suggest that it was all down to female conspiracy, and defended that in no uncertain terms. So take the consequences of that, which are, to be honest, a lot less than they should be.
It would not be hard to get out of this; just say “okay, I was out of order there, I was really annoyed by that, this is my _real_ argument”.
Is this the same Shelley that raised hell about the Ashton Kutcher DMCA complaint too? That was a whole debacle that had ‘stupid funny’ written all over it. And you got ripped to proverbial pieces by horrible grammar and lack of legal knowledge from that “lawyer”, I bet you’re still hurting from that painful episode, crying your life away a little bit each day because of it. I’ll make sure to call the waaaahmbulance over this too. I’m not sure if I’ve added enough seething sarcasm to this yet. People (not you) get offended at the stupidest of things, especially when they’re deeply over their head.
This is even funnier because you’re both lawyers and one of you is well versed in actual copyright law and one so obviously isn’t. I don’t see this as a sexist comment, a lot of women typically think they have to be right about everything (my own mother included) even if they’re not. On the flip, there’s a lot of men with the same schtick. I think people are trying to stick pokers in you while the whole blognation debacle is still fresh in the hive mind of the Internet, hopefully to tug and cut away at you.
Hold on – how exactly does the blognation shuttering fit into all this? I genuinely would like to know.
Okay, I am about to step into it with the Tech Big Boys, so recall I am a mere mortal woman TV show blogger… k???
I just read the supposed sexist remark on the orginal page, gotta tell ya…….. not so sexist to me. And I am a woman. I have seen woman play that card (my opinion here not anyone elses) and hate it. If she was ticked enough to do what she did, fine. Would a man have gotten the same response from Google and whomever else had the video up? I am not so sure.
Recall, i said I am a mortal, so don’t shoot me , but there are times when that card has been played, what ever that is my opinion….. but leave off on the man who made the comment, he obviously did not mean it to be taken the way so many have.
There’s obviously history here, so it’s not as simple as generic man making a comment @ generic woman. If he had said it that way, I might buy it, but he really didn’t. He was specific about it being that one particular woman who felt that way. Go home, PC police.
slow news day? obviously, you’re looking to jack hits on this lame blog of yours.
I don’t think the comment was sexist at all, but I do believe it to be incredibly inappropriate. As Michael Arrington you’ve created a name, brand even, around your web and tech knowledge. As such it is your responsibility to take a deep breathe in heated situations and think about the implications of what you say/post so that you don’t put your name/brand in jeopardy in the heat of the moment. You’re not a sexist, but you did make a mistake and you probably should own up to it.
no its not sexist, yes Mathew was right and the dooce in the video bases his whole argument on a mis-quote
Wow, I think Eric Rice needs to get a job
Mike, I’m skeptical that being called sexist is career-ending. I think many blog readers are catching on that accusations of sexism are very often used to promote oneself or silence others. In this case, both.
Ok, here’s a random idea. Mike, why don’t you join the conversation in Seesmic. I’m with Ordinal as far as how it sounds to me, but I’m willing to discuss it. I’d like to hear your words.
I don’t think your comment was sexist. Not to change the subject too much, but Lane posted a response to all this controversy on her blog, and you can tell she still doesn’t understand why people are upset with her.
My name is Shelley Powers. I have a weblog, Burningbird. I’ve weblogged for seven years. I write regularly on issues important to women.
I am a real person, though Michael has done his best to dehumanize me. What I don’t understand is why one of you didn’t think to ask him who I really am. You just all gave your opinions.
Not only was it sexist, it was infantile and spoken from a place of privilege and entitlement (“I’ll do whatever the f*** I want”? Seriously?).
Sure, do whatever you want. Just be prepared when people call you out for it. But leaders — true leaders — can (and do) argue without stooping to this level.
I’d never read TechCrunch or heard of you until this blew over (yes, the air is very rare up here in the Great White North). I have to say, however, that your behavior not only gave me a poor impression of you as a person, but of TechCrunch as a whole.
Robin Wauters – the scores of people who commented, sent me emails (like you), etc. who said I was to blame for blognation shutting down. It got to me, a lot.
Cecily – fine, you think it was sexist, although you obviously think it’s fine for Shelley to base her opinions on the sex of the person she’s talking about. But is it fine for Eric to organize a mob to try to take apart my business? Are you SO sure I was being sexist that you are fine with the accusation, which equates to tearing my business and life apart? I believe the answer to both is yes. Thanks for stopping by.
There’s a difference in saying “Go Call A Sponsor Now Phone Lines Are Open!” and comparing a Web 2.0 environment, where those that offend are accessible as well as their sponsors, which is not the case in a Don Imus kinda of world where ‘letter to the editor/station’ provides as much reassurance as calling a congressman. Sounds good, feels futile.
I’m not calling a single sponsor, but it is certainly a huge topic for the entire social media sphere to address and certainly worth asking if this is a course of action. I don’t boycott crap, that’s silly. And the sponsors anyway are most likely on the FM Ad network. Everything is on autopilot most likely.
AND HOW exactly is ‘out of context’ when someone says ‘you side with her cuz she’s a woman’? Um, maybe try asking for a glass of water so we can interpret it as asking for a glass of wine. What? How else is it supposed to interpreted? You were complimenting her on a hairstyle ffs? Be absolutely, REAL, already.
I think you know you have a leadership role in the Web 2.0 space, regardless of how critics may or may not agree.
Act like a leader. Please.
Meh one of those sentences didn’t come out as eloquent as I wanted, but we’re probably smart enough to figure it out.
Sorry to bust the grammar troll fun, move along, now.
Eric -
http://twitter.com/spin/statuses/508249732
That is most certainly a direct “call” to a sponsor, and your other twitter messages and the video have more general threats.
What bothers me the most is that you seem to be having “fun” with this whole thing.
http://twitter.com/spin/statuses/509029422
You completely disregard the history I (and many others) have with Shelley, are willing to apply your own context to my comments, won’t take my calls before you go nuclear.
I believe Shelley sides with Lane because Lane is a woman. I don’t believe all or even most women would do this. My past suggests I don’t have a sexist bone in my body (again, our CEO, who I hired, is a woman).
I believe Shelley is the kind of person who sees the world through sexist glasses. She is unpleasant. She is a troll on TechCrunch who won’t go away. I asked her if she’d be defending me if I was the one who sent the DMCA notice. She wouldn’t. She’d be attacking. In one of my posts she even compared Lane’s actions to how I handled the TechCrush incident, where I didn’t hire a lawyer, I didn’t threaten to sue, and I didn’t take any content down.
http://www.crunchnotes.com/?p=284
Where was Shelley then? Where where you? Either ignoring the situation or on the other side of it, no doubt.
The fact that you are willing to raise a mob via twitter and the seesmic video, and prepare to call me a sexist, which we both know is career ending, just makes me sick.
This is absurd. Mike has the balls to point something out that’s pretty blatant, and people are going to crucify him? Absolutely insane. Go ahead get rid of one of the few guys who actually gives a shit and genuinely enjoys writing about startups and our industry. If that happens, I think we’ve all lost. Stop trolling around and looking for a fight in any comment that might resemble in some miniscule way an off color comment. Prejudice is in my mind, making decisions blindly based upon beliefs without any regard for a logical opposing opinion. I’d call Shelley the prejudicial one here. Let’s cut the ganging up on Mike, and let him get back to what he does best and is passionate about- covering startups. Love him or hate him, it’s made this industry a whole lot better. Let’s not ruin it over some people blowing things out of proportion.
-J
Well said Jason.
I believe Shelley is the kind of person who sees the world through sexist glasses. She is unpleasant. She is a troll on TechCrunch who won’t go away.
This is getting ridiculous. Shelley Powers is a well-respected member of the tech blogging community, an author of numerous books and a prominent advocate for women in tech.
Anyone who knows her — and many of us do through her writing — can cite numerous times when she’s criticized prominent women without a hint of favoritism regarding gender. The notion she’d take Lane Hartwell’s side because she’s a woman is complete and utter bullshit without a scintilla of evidence to back it up. I suspect on some level that you know this, because in this weblog entry you didn’t provide her name or a link to her blog, as if you were afraid of what your readers would think if they read her side.
If you keep attacking her character and making her sound like she’s harassing you by participating in the open forum you provide on TechCrunch, you’re going to motivate people to make Eric Rice’s figurative boycott a real one. And I’ll be the first person to start making those calls.
Mike, I understand that you feel your livelihood is threatened by this guy, but I remain surprised that you have paid him any attention at all. He clearly doesn’t deserve it, just as Shelley doesn’t.
I’d hate to see you stop writing at TechCrunch, but I think a long vacation may be in order so you can take a step back from recent events and hit the reset button.
Mike, You’ve said here something very honest — that the blognation shuttering and its aftermath hit you hard because of accusations that its ending was your fault. That your guard was down over that mess, so you were already hot under the collar and what was on the tip of your tongue. The only thing missing is: Sorry, Shelley.
Instead you keep at it. Stop it, and mean it when you stop it.
Listen, being “unpleasant” is a lot different than being sexist, racist, or trollish. If unpleasantness is a crime, then the Leaderboard crew better line up for their strip search now.
Ok, I think I disagree with that Eric Rice guy.
So by these newfangled blogger rules, I think we can all agree it’s time to boycott him!
OK then…lesse…what does Eric Rice do? Going to ericrice.com… searching… searching… Er….
Seems like that video was his career highlight. And I already watched it. D’oh! I suck at boycotts!
mike, you got nobody to apologize too. this neomccarthyism is utter total crap. eric rice: have you no decency?
Jeneane – Every interaction I’ve ever had with Shelley has been unpleasant to the extreme, and I have never initiated any interaction. I believe she is biased, perverse and mean spirited. If I could go back and rewrite that comment, I would. I would take more time to explain that it was aimed solely at her. I would point out the scores of fucked up comments she’s left on TechCrunch, taking shots at me. But the core message would be the same. I believe Shelley supported Lane because Lane is a woman. And you people are trying to take down TechCrunch because I believe that.
It’s not a sexist comment. It’s not an ad hominen attack. It’s simply the truth.
If this mob is representative of the community, then I don’t want to be part of the community any more.
Honest opinions should be celebrated, not condemned. If all you want is politically correct polished speeches, and you are willing to go to these lengths to attack anyone who doesn’t fall into line, I’m sure you’ll get it. Have fun.
And Rogers – what hole did you crawl back out from under? I thought your days of trolling techcrunch were over.
Look, you people have already won. You called me a sexist, and you don’t recover from that. You’re just kicking a dead horse at this point, so move on to your next victim.
Wow, just Wow. I cant believe this has gone so far. Holy smokes!
H-I-L-A-R-I-O-U-S
Who called Mike sexist? Anyone? The objection to the comment was that you were calling Shelley sexist. Not the other way around.
I think you’re listening to the wrong people on this and reading motives into comments that just aren’t there. I do know that I read TC often and rarely see Shelley there.
Now, I better get back to my name-calling fest with Laruen Feldmen over on Twitter. I agree with you on this: My GOD this space is getting stupid.
Jeneane – What the hell. Did you even watch Eric’s video or see his twitter?
Comments are closed. Have fun with the witch burning. I’d enjoy it, except I appear to be the witch.