3 ms·

This is a case where "disruption" is bad, because "disruption" usually involves overhaul of older ethical principles that emerged after decades of missteps. Jo

This is a case where "disruption" is bad, because "disruption" usually involves overhaul of older ethical principles that emerged after decades of missteps. Journalism is being disrupted (and has been for over 30 years) and the result is that reliable, just-the-facts is getting overrun by this nonsense. People are comparing this to Valleywag. Actually, I like Valleywag. I think it's great. It is exactly what it says it is, and it's helping to break down VC-istan's image and prestige, which is exactly what it will take to save Real Technology. Valleywag is, perhaps unintentionally, tech's best friend right now. This, on the other hand, is a five-alarm fuckup. You do not alter peoples' quotes like that, or lie to them in the way that PG was lied to, and keep your reputation. The old newspapers and journalists (with very rare, if high-profile, exceptions) knew that; but a lot of these post-disruption actors seem not to.

eru 13y ago
> Journalism is being disrupted (and has been for over 30 years) and the result is that reliable, just-the-facts is getting overrun by this nonsense. Are you sure we ever actually had the paradise we lost?
netcan 13y ago
I disagree. The real "disruption" here is pg's response and subsequent responses, including yours. Yellow journalism is still a problem. Most people who read some little quote about women in tech from some guy they've never heard of move on. For the core group of people who are interested, the best way to learn about pg's opinions is from pg himself and that is easy to do. New standards need to emerge. Publishing transcripts or recordings would be a good place to start. But the ability of misquoted individuals to respond is itself a disruption.