When mainstream media gets on board something, it’s usually too late. I thought the exception to this was the type of things that have sent consumer Web media into a frenzy, that being many of the so-called Web 2.0 startups.
A good barometer of what is new in the space can be found on Tech Crunch, the wildly successful site run by Michael Arrington that “obsessively covers Web 2.0 startups.” To his credit, Arrington has stayed true to what got him to launch and build the site: cover companies that are new to the space or existing companies that are doing new things.
But now when I check out the site, I’m worried that the debate over “what is Web 2.0 / are we entering Web 3.0″ is secondary to the actual state of the landscape if TC really is the barometer.
In a 2 day span, TC covered:
- a peeing site
- Kevin Rose’s 3rd startup
- a back from the dead company, Swaptree
- a walking dead company, Feedster
In all fairness, there were interesting tidbits in between, but these were, largely, fillers.
Oh, and in between those two last ones, there was a post on a site that allows you to humiliate your friends.
I should disclose, that I have in 2006 and just yesterday (after seeing the comments made by TC readers asking “are you running out of companies to cover” in the “peeing post”) asked the TC editors if they wanted to cover our launch and relaunch next week, because there (yes I’m biased) is an interesting case study as it pertains to a) video, search and listings; b) content strategy; and generally why we’re about to do what we’re doing, and what drives it after 18 months of experience as a company operating at the crossroads of video and search.
Anyway, I don’t for one second expect TC to cover it, mainly because despite the search and matching technologies we have, we’re mainly a content company (and not a UGC one at that). So yes, we actually have substance. Maybe it’s also because I have both praised and criticized TC’s founder, though I don’t actually think that last part is relevant compared to the former reason.
The point I’m making, simply, is that much the same way that 1998-2001 saw a lot of filler get headlines and give the broader success stories of the Web a bad name from 2001-05, TC is now becoming counter-effective in helping the entrepreneurs and innovators that will build the most successful companies over the next 1 to 10 years.
This really is not a critique of TC or Michael Arrington’s website, though it could be construed as that. It’s a reflection of the state of matters. Despite me saying that, I probably won’t make too many friends amongst Friends of Mike, his critics, or other people who’s voices and thoughts I respect. There’s many others I read whom I did not mention here, but ask them the same question, and see what the private and public answer is. Apparently, I’m not the first to point this out, and that was in early 2006, the drumbeat has only accelerated since though.
And much like Arrington himself, I don’t care if people think I’m being critical of someone, I’m not, I am usually critical of things. Point is: we’re all entitled to our own opinions and I’d certainly welcome their (along with Michael’s) two cents on this question.
But much like Digg became what it sought to avoid and replace, TC is now not helping the industry. That’s really not Arrington or his teams’ fault, it is “the system.”
Oddly, notice how all VCs canonize Mike out of fear that he won’t cover their investments etc., but ultimately this breeds a culture of investing in bad companies (in the words of commentors on TC, that’s not my opinion). Arrington, perhaps unwillingly, has become the reincarnation of the analysts who during Web 1.0 inflated the bubble and then became unfairly the scapegoats for a bunch of other people’s greed and near-sightedness.
I won’t name who I’m talking about there, but we’re all smart enough to see which companies will be this era’s reincarnation of socks, groceries et al.
The acid test, really, is this: if someone asked you “what’s this Web 2.0 thing I keep hearing about, it’s all BS” and you wanted to portray it in a positive light, would you still tell them “check out TechCrunch.”
I don’t think that I would, and it’s a darn shame.
Related:
- April Fool’s Joke: News Corp. buys Tech Crunch
Subscribe:
June 30th, 2007 at 12:03 pm
Your closing thought really sums it up well. Many will argue that we’re not in a bubble again this time though, because there is a much larger user base to support some crazy ideas. For instance, there might actually be enough quirky people will cell phones out there to actually make Mizpee work. I think this bubble will support itself for a while but, you’re right, it’s painful to watch the bubble expand on TC.