Unlike Keith, you are entirely clueless as to exactly how important ethics are to news organizations like the Post.

personally, i think the ethics issue is ridiculously overstated. there’s a difference between WaPo and the New York Post of course, but to think that any large media outlet isn’t substantially influenced by advertisers — or other people of money or power — is incredibly naive, and smacks of elitism, not ethics. mike isn’t shy of stating what he invests in, and in Silicon Valley pretty much everyone and their grandmother are angels in 3 or 4 startups (i’m in ~15).

furthermore, to suggest that newspapers and/or media properties that don’t have direct investments / ownership interests are somehow devoid of any such conflicts is complete BS. they have conflicts from debt & revenue, if not equity. they certainly have conflicts due to sex, power, guns, drugs, politics & other currencies of influence. however for the most part you don’t hear about those.

finally, the manner in which betsy called him out was itself childish & conflicted. not to mention taking it to the level of calling out WaPo to eff around with the TC deal is COMPLETELY AND OBVIOUSLY conflicted. she is far beyond hypocritical there.

mike may be capricious, vindictive, sexist, arrogant, and combative… but he’s also hard-working, very intelligent, funny, entertaining, and as far as i’m aware generally not a crook.

my .02,

- dave “no conflict, no interest” mcclure

I appreciate your email and you are a very good friend to post here.

But, my main point, more than anything, was conduct and I am perplexed that Michael felt he has to make three boorish comments in a row that just were not what I would expect of someone who just struck a deal with the Post.

I would have to disagree strongly that he was in any way reserved.

I do know many people at the Post are appalled by those remarks.

Bad actors or not, it is bogus to blame jealousy and use it as an excuse for bad behavior in fighting off criticism. If he had managed to control himself and taken the high road, he would have prevailed.

He might think he has the right to say anything he wants, and I guess he does, but that’s a pretty lame use for freedom of speech.

True story: A kid at my six-year-old son’s school said something not nice to him recently that had a grain of truth in it, but was needlessly cruel.

It hurt my son a lot, I can assure you, but he managed not to strike back by saying something just as bad to the other kid, which would have been easy and satisfying even.

If my six-year-old has the presence of mind to control himself on a playground, I think Michael Arrington surely can do it in a public forum.

It would have been nice to have seen Arrington taken the higher ground here. There is no need to lash out at people publicly all the time when you get upset. This seems to be a blog trait, and one that will ultimately ruin credibility for everyone.
People get tired of whiners, and vengeful soap operas. He seems to have diarrhea of the mouth and needs to shut up.

He needs to ignore people and work on growing his company. When incidents like this happen, he is taking two steps back for every step of progress.

And I really think his reaction doesn’t affect the Post or its reputation at all.

Disclosure, Mikes a friend and I’m biased naturally. But not my only friend. As I read the sources and the comments I just think you’re on the wrong side of this one.

Keith

Arrington appears clue-impaired when it comes to an obvious conflict of interest, Gizmodo carries on with their boorish antics at CES, Fake Steve Jobs compromises his employer’s integrity. The list seems to go on and on.

Glad I took another route out of the news industry, and still get to do what I love without acting like a spoiled child, or lacking a basic understanding of the foundations of credibility.

Throwing in their lot with a single tech blog instead of following a model more similar to Blogburst was asking for something like this. The blog world gets into pissing matches all the time, and either they knew that and decided that any press is good press or they thought it would stop once TC was associated with the WaPo is anyone’s guess. In the end, however, everyone who lays down with dogs comes up with fleas.

Actually, a nice read. I love how you reveal your sensitive side, while stabbing away at the Bull in the Silicon Shop.

Speaking of which, who else wants to see Arrington and Ballmer enter the Thunderdome?

You had me at the volcano diagram, nice. :D