6 ms·
Has The TechCrunch Machine Gotten Out of Control?
- retube 15y agoThis is a pretty weak post, and states the obvious. tldr; much of techcrunch coverage focuses on the larger heavyweight firms.
- PaulHoule 15y agoIt's hard for a site like that to not focus on the heavyweight firms. I remember scanning Slashdot in 1999 and found that most of the links went to bigger sites; the story that some small site would get in Slashdot and get a huge amount of publicity was the exception, not the rule. TechCrunch wouldn't get the audience it gets if it wasn't focused on brands that people care about. If it was all about tiny obscure companies, TechCrunch would be a tiny obscure site.
- ignifero 15y agoThe odd thing is that much of its coverage is persistently about relatively unsuccessful startups like quora, path, foursquare, asana [watch out for the flood here], colo(u)r etc, many of which owe a large part of their audience to their continued coverage. One rarely reads critical or skeptical articles on techcrunch. Lately, i 've turned to like bloomberg West instead for my SV briefing.
- PaulHoule 15y agoMy guess is that Arrington feels it's a machine that's gotten out of control but he doesn't have a way off.
- tatsuke95 15y agoPart of me thinks that if we see the "worst case scenario" tech bubble pop, combined with the "Aol Way" brand of journalism, Techcrunch will fade into obscurity over the next five years.
- Macha 15y agoWell at least there's one positive aspect to the worst case scenario then.
- Yhippa 15y agoThere was an interesting comment at the bottom of the post about how TC could lose out to basically anybody who out-scoops him on a story and about how TC hangs its hat on being able to publish first. I think it would be great if they could maybe move away from the "ready, fire, aim" the author talks about and provides really sound analysis and discussion about startups.
- ivanbernat 15y agoI remember when TC was just beginning and it was full of stories about micro companies doing cool stuff with new technologies. Big companies were rarely given any coverage at all. Today it's completely different. Most articles look like recycled PR posts about Company X raising Y millions from a Z fund. Another thing that is completely ruining it is non-stop fan boy posts (MG anyone?).
- jsherry 15y agoThere was actually a guest post on TC regarding this topic recently, which broke it down according to the data: http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/12/math-of-techcrunch-startups/ http://techcrunch.com/2011/06/12/math-of-techcrunch-startups... The conclusion in the author's words: "TechCrunch is covering more early-stage startups than ever before, but sadly that coverage is often drowned out by an even greater volume of posts on larger companies."
- timjahn 15y ago"Most articles look like recycled PR posts about Company X raising Y millions from a Z fund." Spot on. I can't stand that. Who cares, really? How do any of those articles add any value to what any of us are doing?
- ca136 15y agoI used to spend a lot of time on TC, but there's so much fluff and crap to filter through it's not worth it anymore. Now I only find myself there if there's an interesting link on HN. And the best articles by far are written by guest authors. It really isn't a useful or productive resource for startups, it's kind of like the TMZ of the tech world.
- besvinick 15y agoGreat call on the TMZ analogy - it's become too mainstream and gossipy. I'm all for hearing major news about the big name startups, but I feel like they have sold out by not giving as much exposure to the up-and-comers.
- egze 15y agoWhat are the good alternatives to TechCrunch?
- siglesias 15y agoGigaOM
- soulonfire 15y agoI have stopped reading techcrunch.com about 7/8 months ago even though I still subscribe to its rss feed. The website is bloated and takes forever to load. I have also noticed the quality of the articles go down in the past year or so.
- phereford 15y agoThe AOL buyout has really pushed me to stay away from anything they write. While the quality of articles and writing was dropping pre-buyout, it has definitely gotten much worse post-buyout.
- workhorse 15y agoIt is completely unacceptable that their website loads that slowly.
- donohoe 15y agoOh TechCrunch... I haven't deliberately gone there in months but when I accidently do I can't help but notice how the "Whats Hot" hasn't changed... still been this for a year now? What's Hot: Android, Apple, Facebook, Google, Groupon, Microsoft, Twitter, Zynga If something is "hot" all the time, then its pretty pointless. Thats the UX grouch in me.
- besvinick 15y agoHow is Microsoft "hot?" Last I checked it wasn't 1998...
- ChuckMcM 15y agoSummary: TC has higher volume / lower median quality Time-to-market trumps quality / accuracy in a zero barrier to entry space. The AOL buyout gave TC some resources it didn't have before and it put demands on the staff that were perhaps not as explicit before. That it would evolve is unsurprising, whether or not the evolution is for better or for worse is impossible to predict. If they leave a gap another TC equivalent will grow in that gap. That being said it would be fun to have a site focussed on what the original TC market was, small startups & new ideas & connecting people. And if they could do that without egregious site advertising (I don't mind advertising but the TMZ look is, well distracting to say the least). I would read it. Disclaimer, I still read the RSS feed for TC but don't visit much.
- pedalpete 15y agoMy last company was covered by TC (back in 2007), and I think all this 'blindsided' stuff is insincere. I was happy to get the coverage, but I don't think not being contacted by TC before they posted an article had nothing to do with a 'hot' story. Contacting companies takes time. It may take only 20 minutes to talk to an entrepreneur about there business, but 20 minutes dedicated to each company would really slow down the whole process. It's about pumping out as much content is possible as much as it is breaking a 'hot' story.