5 ms·

Anatomy Of A PR Spin

21 points by icey 16y ago

rumpelstiltskin 16y ago
The problem with Arrington's whining is the lack of reciprocity. They scream bloody murder when their reporting is 'attacked' by PR, but what about the multiple instances prior to this when their reporting really was inaccurate? Can you think of a single post where they said 'we were wrong'? If facebook doesn't release a phone in, say, 3 years, will TC admit they were full of shit? Hell no. They'll simply say facebook did have it as a real project but decided to kill it. How can anyone take them as the 'blog of record' for startups if they don't take responsibility for their inaccurate reporting at least once in a while?
- evansolomon 16y ago
  Whether or not TechCrunch is reasonable about pointing out when they're wrong doesn't seem relevant. Facebook "attacking" their post has nothing to do with what TechCrunch might do if it turns out the post was wrong. Facebook knows if the post was wrong, they're not "attacking" anything to make a point in case it turns out to be wrong.
j_baker 16y ago
I'm calling linkbait. "Our product didn't kill that many people." - PR spin "We're not building a facebook phone." - Possibly a lie, but I wouldn't call it PR spin.
CaptainZapp 16y ago
Of course Facebook is not building a phone. This is why they are apparently talking to hardware manufacturers to build the actual thing. Provided, of course, that the article is true.
notahacker 16y ago
Anatomy of Techcrunch spin: (1) We don't trust PR people and often tell you things they don't want you to hear (2) Sometimes the things they don't want you to hear are true, or become true. Even the 'spin' hasn't expressly ruled out building a phone, ever. And if they do, you heard it here first (3) We're leaving open the possibility that Facebook aren't mentioning their phone because it isn't going to happen. If they don't build a phone, ever, it could just be that the project got killed and it had nothing to do with the quality of our sources.

21 points by icey 16y ago

The problem with Arrington's whining is the lack of reciprocity. They scream bloody murder when their reporting is 'attacked' by PR, but what about the multiple instances prior to this when their reporting really was inaccurate? Can you think of a single post where they said 'we were wrong'? If facebook doesn't release a phone in, say, 3 years, will TC admit they were full of shit? Hell no. They'll simply say facebook did have it as a real project but decided to kill it. How can anyone take them as the 'blog of record' for startups if they don't take responsibility for their inaccurate reporting at least once in a while?

evansolomon 16y ago
Whether or not TechCrunch is reasonable about pointing out when they're wrong doesn't seem relevant. Facebook "attacking" their post has nothing to do with what TechCrunch might do if it turns out the post was wrong. Facebook knows if the post was wrong, they're not "attacking" anything to make a point in case it turns out to be wrong.

j_baker 16y ago

I'm calling linkbait. "Our product didn't kill that many people." - PR spin "We're not building a facebook phone." - Possibly a lie, but I wouldn't call it PR spin.

CaptainZapp 16y ago

Of course Facebook is not building a phone. This is why they are apparently talking to hardware manufacturers to build the actual thing. Provided, of course, that the article is true.

notahacker 16y ago

Anatomy of Techcrunch spin: (1) We don't trust PR people and often tell you things they don't want you to hear (2) Sometimes the things they don't want you to hear are true, or become true. Even the 'spin' hasn't expressly ruled out building a phone, ever. And if they do, you heard it here first (3) We're leaving open the possibility that Facebook aren't mentioning their phone because it isn't going to happen. If they don't build a phone, ever, it could just be that the project got killed and it had nothing to do with the quality of our sources.