4 ms·
Does the editor in chief need to be the center of attention? Maybe he can just hire great talent. I guess the real question is how much less information/scoops
by cienrak 15y ago
Does the editor in chief need to be the center of attention? Maybe he can just hire great talent.
I guess the real question is how much less information/scoops they will have with Mike and MG gone.
- stevoyoung 15y agoThe editor in chief doesn't need to be the center of attention, I agree. BUT in TechCrunch's case he was. Mike had a swagger about him and how he wrote - which I think helped define how the others wrote. I think that's a big part of what made TC what TC is. So in this case, I think it does matter. Can Erick change how the ship is run and still be successful? Sure, but it's going to be hard. BTW, I wasn't clear in my original post. My post was in reference to how both articles were written, not about the content. Swagger vs no swagger.
- ilamont 15y agoSometimes the EIC does need to be the center of attention. It gives the publication a voice. Arrington did it online and in events, the Wired and Tech Review EICs are mostly at the center on the event side, with far less writing/reporting in print and online.
- DevX101 15y agoQuick, no googling! Who's the Editor in Chief of the New York Times? The Wall Street Journal? I have no idea myself and I'd bet most readers of those papers don't.
- ilamont 15y agoWe're not talking about the same thing. The NYT and WSJ are not tech pubs. They generally cover hard news, and in the case of the WSJ, provide a mouthpiece for the conservative political establishment in the United States. These newspapers are not about the EIC or publisher -- all editorials are deliberately unsigned and voice comes through in the reporting style and individual columnists/contributors (Krugman, Friedman, Mossberg, Pogue, etc.).