A lot of people write a lot of stuff that’s pretty negative about TechCrunch. Since I don’t actually do an ego monitor, we miss most of it. But every once in a while something bubbles up and I see it. Usually I don’t respond because it just encourages more of the same.
But today a weird one popped up by a blogger named Umair Haque. He took it down for some reason, although it wasn’t particularly aggressive. Just odd. Here’s the original post:
2008 + The TechCrunch Effect
Admit it. You’re getting just a wee bit tired of TechCrunch. Erick’s posts are usually pretty cool, and TC UK is interesting. But otherwise…between Mike, Duncan, etc, it’s a bit like mistakenly walking into a room filled with screaming harpies.
I’m gonna make a prediction. TechCrunch (etc) are peaking. Without investing in the community - instead of just endlessly playing the community against itself - further growth (real growth, not just beta) is going to be more and more costly.
I’m gonna call this set of dynamics the TechCrunch Effect. It’s the opposite of building a community. Instead of making a set of people with similar interests better off, you wedge them and divide them.
Yes, you can get attention that way - by tapping the dynamics of competition. No, you can’t sustain it - because the returns to competition are dominated by the returns to cooperation in a world where anyone can compete.
2007 was the year of networks. 2008 is going to be the year of communities.
If we’re lucky, Etsy is gonna start emerging as the next Google. Microcommunities are going to explode. Etc. Why? Because at the edge, love is more powerful than hate - a lot more powerful.
NB - Mike B has a nice and funny response here, which you should read.
I have a feeling I’m gonna take maaajor heat for this post, so let me leave you with three thoughts.
1) When I say love in the context of communities, I don’t mean just giving good reviews. I mean managing the community so everyone’s better off, not arguing all the time.
2) If you wanna comment, no flames for either side please. Bubblegen and TC aren’t competitors, there’s no need for anyone to feel threatened, so let’s focus on constructive criticism.
3) Yes, of course, I could just be wrong.
My quick comments:
First, on the issue of creating controversy - we’ve always done this. Its not new. It’s my personality. But we do lot of community building, too. And for anyone that thinks startups don’t get an advantage by being covered by us should read this.
Second, on the issue of community - I don’t know how to respond to this exactly. The problem isn’t that our community is growing. The problem is that growth, by definition, leads to the degradation of a community. The wingnuts arrive, and the trolls take up residence. Our challenge is to find a way to engage a larger audience while keeping the interest of our core readers. That may be impossible - and someday I may spin myself out of TechCrunch and start a new blog. The topic - new startups.
Third, Etsy isn’t the new Google.
I don’t know if TechCrunch will exist in a year. Or ten years. Remember that I started it as a hobby. But I do know that I have a dream job, that I created myself, and that I’m surfing one really fun wave right now. Whatever happens next, happens.
Mike for FWIW, that is the growing opinion within blogosphere..I think you are wrong here …”The problem is that growth, by definition, leads to the degradation of a community. ”
Organic Growth is well being of community w/greater potentional of expansion. (core readers). I for one (sub’ed to TC, late 2005 ?) and now I am seeing some meaningless post been put up. no fact checking just rehashing same old news and for those who are ahead of the curve they can immediately spot an “echo post” and move along..
your correct about the wingnuts and troll’s but the drudge forum and the MUD’s had em long before blogs even become main stream..
Feb 21: “But I do know that I have a dream job, that I created myself, and that I’m surfing one really fun wave right now.”
Feb 07: “What’s bothering me is that this is the fourth time I’d gotten ill enough to miss work just since last summer.”
The contrast in a life bothered about their progressively worsening health. Mike, someone close to you, whom you respect, needs to be in your face - now…
I’m not sure a spin-off blog for new start-ups would be wise, but perhaps an entirely new information architecture whereby people can subscribe to a pre-defined set of RSS feeds, e.g. leaving out all posts about Yahoo, Google, Facebook, Microsoft, …
I, for one, wouldn’t be in favor of splitting your feeds. You’ve already done that, in a sense, with CrunchGear.
People will always complain about too many stories, but it really doesn’t take that long to skip over the ones that you aren’t interested in.
I read TechCrunch because I don’t have the time or the expertise to evaluate all the startups that pop up and so I outsource that to you Michael and your fellow writers. I don’t know about TechCrunch and “hating” but I actually usually find TC to be less skeptical then I’d like. I love the YouNoodle post (and posted as such) because it was a brutally honest takedown and I enjoy that.
I don’t know about the community and all that. I generally don’t read the commments unless I have one to add myself.
One of the best quotes of the year. Someone, please someone - reprint this 100 times all over. (Now Arrington is not paying me).
“The problem is that growth, by definition, leads to the degradation of a community”.
Look around YOUR old neighborhood. This transcends everything!
What community have you been building?
Mike created the community (along with a ton of other passionate people). I saw it. Any thoughts otherwise are absurd.
1. It was Mike who first stared asking companies to his house to simply chat — no one else really cared. He made these people feel as if their work was *important* …
2. It was Mike who threw the first parties of web 2.0 (besides the geek dinners). Not that long ago that only 8-10 people cared to show.
3. It was Mike who took the time to ask the questions. This went a long way when we were sitting in a dingy apartment building out of love.
Mike you did it. Be proud.
TechCrunch, and essentially Mike, have been fundamental to providing the play-by-play for the Web 2.0 community…which is represented by the thousands of startups, as well as established companies, and the people trying to surf the wave or watch the ebb and flow, to survive in the Darwinian tech world that has emerged from the commercial Internet. Major conversation and foment happens within TC, which is part of what makes a community. It is a community that thrives on trying to keep up with the frenetic pace of innovation and the “sporting” competition…in this case which is redefining personal computing and defining the digital culture. Not everyone is singing kumbaya. There are different kinds of communities, just as in the analog world, and what is compelling is that the Internet and better tools makes this possible. Communities reflect the personalities of their leaders. Mike and his group and others building new media publishing companies, like Om, Matt, Richard and Pete, are creating communities based on attracting audiences who want to associate with their brands and personalities. There is no one community…even Facebook is tens of thousands of communities build on a common foundation.
I agree with Brian that Mike defined the community in the early days. However, Mike, I think it’s a very strange thing to say that you might spin out a new blog from TechCrunch which is about new startups. Isn’t that what TC is supposed to be about? Isn’t that what your core readers came to TC for in the first place? Maybe that’s a teensy little sign that TC has lost its focus a weensy bit. With all due respect, etc etc.
From personal experience as a tech journo, I know it’s gratifying to write endless articles about the big players and to have people from the industry behemoths be interested in what you have to say. That way lies Gillmoritis and Cringely Syndrome, where all you have to say is framed in the perspective of boring old dead companies because you lose touch with any company not started 20 years ago.
Mike,
You have never been the “decider” of success or failure for startups. Dopes who trip over themselves to get your attention are losers.
What decides success or failure? If you don’t know, then you too are a loser.
Your overblown ego is disgusting. I would never trust a goddamn lawyer to inform me about technology. Get over yourself.
I am new to the whole TechCrunch scene, and it is a “TechCrunch scene” It’s Mike’s hard work in action and it’s a hot scene based the level of energy (good and bad) people put in their responses.
One thing I gotta say (in Mike’s favor) is that he could have easily filtered out all the nasty responses. But he didn’t.
Based on the responses, it *sounds like* Mike antagonizes a lot of people on regular basis (for fun, pleasure or just the way his psychology is wired, no offense, or maybe for a strangely altruistic purpose, e.g. to keep people competing and to keep the whole thing going, which is far better than seeing the Web 2.0/3.0/X.0 momentum die out…)
Yet he lets everyone speak their mind.
I would say that he knows what he’s doing.
So keep it up, for good or bad.
I doubt that appeasing everyone is gonna lead to euphoria.
I *always* reserve the right to change my mind.
‘)
Marc
What I don’t understand is why everyone’s so in love with Etsy. Etsy? It’s a marketplace for tat.
Community is as community does.
That is, for example:
TechCrunch, and all sites, sets the tone (in addition to the rules and structure) for its community.
The commenters on TechCrunch are extremely active, which shows a high level of engagement of the site (the large number of techcrunch links and coverage in the blogosphere also attests to this and to the sites’ influence). However, TechCrunch is not a community (to my mind) because readers cannot interact with each other beyond public comments. They cannot vote on companies. And they cannot vote on TechCrunch stories.
It is, in my opinion, a very top-down editorial standard by today’s quickly evolving Internet standards.
Michael’s point about the degredation of a community with size is interesting, and I think also a good one. I would recommend something like a commenter rating system, to begin with, perhaps along the lines of eBay feedback. That way, one can get at least a beginning sense (such ratings can also degenerate themselves into a popularity or “gamed/marketed/currency” system) of the credibility of the commenters.
If TechCrunch is really bold, they could institute a rating system also for posters. Then we could see who really are the favorites, and why (if not done carefully that could be divisive to a site I would imagine, but how can one - even a leading site such as TechCrunch - improve without refined metrics of user feedback and experience).
Mike, I consider myself have lost a little love for TechCrunch the past year. It’s not the volume of stories, it’s the quality. Specifically, I skip most every story written by Duncan Riley. His writing lacks wit, insight, and appropriate civility.
I’m OK with creating controversy, as long as there’s intelligence behind a critique. I enjoy your posts, especially the most pointed ones. But Riley’s posts lack that intelligence to make it worth the read.
He has some points, but I don’t think it has 100% merit. I love the TechCrunch content for the most part and read it daily. You introduce me to new companies, give a brief overview of what you think about their product, let me know how they received funding (if any) and I think CrunchBase is a good compliment.
The user comments are really getting out of hand, they are not productive in most cases and there is really too much flaming etc going on. Here are some community ideas I would suggest:
1) I would love to see the ability to rate user comments, or users in general. If there is a person that is constantly posting garbage on the site, I want to rate that person’s feedback on a 1-10 scale, maybe as “reputation” that stays with that person. The higher the reputation, the closer they are to the top of the comments on a post. I.E. most useful comments come first and the spam crap is at the bottom, or hidden and can be expanded.
2) Create a user account system where new users have to be approved, and can be banned, much like a traditional forum. There are enough readers on TechCrunch where you can ban some of the spammers and still retain a large amount of posts. This will ensure that quality comments and users remain, and will ultimately attract conversation from more intelligent readers.
3) What about user reviews? Let those same quality/approved users rate the companies you are talking about as well. Do they think the product is good, and will the company have a chance at success?
These are just some off-the-cuff ideas that I think will help encourage a healthy community and add some more value to the site.
What you are going through are typical growing pains. There is no reason to give up. Just harness it and shape it how you see fit. This is a GOOD problem to have.
Best of luck.
Ian
I actaully think a spin off blog just for startups is a great idea and would get a large audeince.
I have to admit, I have tired of the constant news on large companies and what your mates are doing (also maybe some disclosure if you are friends with the people who are runnning the company wouldn’t hurt).
Also when posting what Robert had for breakfast maybe you could use this blog instead.
I know its a hard to please everyone and many of us forget its YOUR blog.
The real question, Mike, is whether you can (or care to) make the jump with TC from early adopters to the mass market. With Web 2 feeling tired and a lot more of TC’s focus on major players (Yahoo, M$ and Facebook seem to garner the majority of today’s posts) and post-series A funded companies, what made TC unique (=information of the under reported, early seed start ups) has been marginalized and, along with it, a bit of the mystique of seeing under the hood of Silicon Valley.
Put simply, if you’re going after a tech version of the Wall Street Journal, good for you, if not, then I’ve most enjoyed TC’s work covering those little unheard of gems that haven’t even released a Beta. Sounds like you might, too.
Regardless, it is a fun wave.
C
It’s your choice. A big and characterless media or a small and cult-like niche. I, like other young consultants at McKinsey, BCG and Bain, used to believe this is an analytical issue, where there is an NPV answer. No. This is about what you want TC (or even you) to be. Good luck.
I didn’t want to go public with this quite yet, but aw hell. I’m actually starting a love based business like Etsy too.
It’s called HugsOnline. We plan to be the peapod of hugs with a wide distribution network delivering hugs to our customers in response to real time requests.
The business model is built on unicorns, puppies, lollipops, and fairies. It’s going to be the next Google.
- Keep up the good fight.
The God’s honest truth is that blowhards always win. We’re wolves eternally searching for that next Alpha Male. IT SUCKS BUT IT’S TRUE, so if TechCrunch is smart (oh, and it is) it will not only maintain but intensify the snark, sarcasm, cynicism, and anti-intellectual bear-baiting, and I will be watching closely to see who comes out on top so I can align myself, cynically, with that next Alpha, forever and ever, amen. Animal wins, man loses. FOREVER, did I mention that? Forever.