aol

Time for Arrington to Leave TechCrunch Behind

By Mark Evans in Blogs, Startups No Comments Tags: , , ,

ArringtonThe tech world is all aflutter today because Michael Arrington has created new a $20-million venture capital fund to invest in start-ups.

Given Arrington and the growing army of TechCrunch bloggers cover start-ups, there is clearly ethical and journalistic issues given TechCrunch could easily write about companies within CrunchFund’s investment portfolio.

A few things: One, the objections over Arrington’s involvement with start-ups as a blogger and an investor are nothing new. Arrington has been happily fishing in both ponds for years, and been pretty clear about his activity. Why would anyone would be surprised by the formalization of something he’s been openly engaged in?

Arrington is a different and unique beast because blogging is a new world with different rules of engagement than journalism, and, let’s face it, the vast majority of journalists don’t make enough money to invest in start-ups even if they wanted to. At best, journalists jump into the start-ups for the remote chance to make some money – and I’m talking from personal experience.

What I admire about Arrington is he seems unrepentant and unaffected by the kerfuffle he has instigated. Call it arrogance, hubris or being king of the world (or, at least, Silicon Valley) but Arrington is completely comfortable in his own skin.

“I don’t claim to be a journalist,” Arrington told the New York Times. “I hold myself to higher standards of transparency and disclosure.”

This holier-than-thou attitude rankles journalists and hard-core bloggers who play by the old style “rules” but AOL seems fine with Arrington’s new venture, although I suspect it will bend over backwards to keep him in the AOL fold as long as possible.

That said, I think it’s time for Arrington to leave TechCrunch. It’s the classic case of not being able to eat your cake and have it too. TechCrunch has been a spectacular success, and Arrington has achieved fame, glory and riches from selling the business to AOL for $20-million.

But if Arrington really wants to take his career into a different direction, he needs to leave TechCrunch behind. It will be difficult because it’s his baby that he built from scratch but TechCrunch is all grown up now, it has a new mega-size owner, and Arrington would be better off completely focused on new projects instead of still hanging on.

The reality is the Arrington brand is as big as TechCrunch so he doesn’t need TechCrunch, even though they are still stuck at the hip. If Arrington wants to be a venture capitalist, it means making difficult decisions, including parting ways with TechCrunch.

More: Kara Swisher has some interesting insight (surprise, surprise!) about Arrington and CrunchFund.

AOL Making Content King Again

By Mark Evans in Media 1 Comment Tags: , , ,

So let’s get this straight: AOL just spent $315-million to buy the Huffington Post, a move that makes it a “next-generation publishing” entity?

First reaction is not why AOL decided to buy Huffington Post but why Arianna Huffington sold to AOL. Of course, there are 315 million reasons to justify the deal but why throw in the towel to AOL when you’ve got the world in the palm of your hand as the world’s largest and most influential online publisher?

It’s not like Huffington needs the money personally or whether the Huffington Post is lacking growth capital. At the apex of her career, Huffington made a strange decision by taking the money and running. Maybe her investors made her do it given the size of the AOL offer, which is five times the HP’s sales. After six years at the helm, maybe Huffington wants to focus on giving speeches and writing books rather than running a fast-growing online publishing company.

Whatever the reason, AOL is placing a huge bet not only the Huffington Post but the value of content to create a lucrative digital platform. For those of you with a sense of history, AOL pulled the same trick a decade ago with a marriage to Time-Warner in the name of digital convergence – and we all know how well that turned out.

With Huffington Post and TechCrunch now in the fold, AOL has swooped up two of the highest profile digital publishers and, along with it, two of the more interesting entrepreneurs (Huffington and TechCrunch’s Mike Arrington) along with it.

All I can say is “interesting”.

Is Facebook the New AOL?

By Mark Evans in Social Media 18 Comments Tags: , , ,

Does anyone remember AOL?

I’m not talking about the AOL that is scrambling to stay competitive but the AOL of a decade ago that was, in many respects, the Web for millions of people.

AOL created a user-friendly online ecosystem that met all your needs – email, content, services and, of course, access to the Internet (albeit via dial-up). It was a wonderful walled garden that meant there was really no need to wander out into the Wild Web. For AOL, it was a lucrative business. For AOL customers, it was Web Lite: convenient, easy to use and understand but dull given all the exciting things happening on the Web.

In the end, AOL’s walled garden became irrelevant as people discovered the Web had so much more to offer than the limited view offered by AOL. It was a great ride but AOL’s efforts to be all things to all people came to an abrupt end as consumers sought more choice and freedom.

So, what’s the connection between Facebook and AOL?

The key link is Facebook’s growing ambitions to be the destination for its 550 million users. By launching new services such as Places, Deals and e-mail (and offering an option to make Facebook your http://techcrunch.com/2010/11/21/facebook-homepage/), Facebook wants its users to spend most, if not all, of their time in Facebook. This is above and beyond the 5.5 hours/month the average Facebook already spends on Facebook.

While offering more services makes Facebook a more multi-dimensional service, it is also starting to make Facebook more complicated and confusing. From its roots as a service to communicate and share with friends and family, Facebook now wants to be a lot more. In fact, you could argue it wants to be everything.

It begs the question: what is Facebook and what is its role?

The big danger for Facebook is as it drives to become all things to all people, it risks becoming a cluttered landscape that will start to suffer from offering too many choices. It’s sort of like going to eat at a restaurant with a menu that goes on and on and on. While there are lots of options, making a decision is a major challenge.

And as Facebook looks to offer every popular service, it threatens to becoming a good, but not great, at any of them. At the same time, its users could start to feel that Facebook is trying to be too much, which could drive them to other services as a way to keep control.

Maybe this is just a small indicator but a blog post on TechCrunch by Jon Evans caught my attention because it’s a influential voice taking a serious poke at Goliath – something I haven’t seen enough of amid Facebook’s tremendous growth.

“I dislike Facebook because they’re mediocre. They have a platform and opportunity unlike anyone else, ever—and what have they done with it? Nothing. None of their so-called innovations are actually even remotely so. Copying Twitter was smart, but hardly new; ditto Foursquare. They called Facebook Groups an innovation; it’s a basic feature they should have implemented years ago. Now they’re laughably trying to claim that integrating email into their messaging system is a world-shaking revolution.”

Any way you want to slice it, Evans is making a pretty cutting statement that I think reflects the concerns many people may have about Facebook but reluctant to publicly express. Let’s face it, Facebook is a good service but far from perfect.

The more Facebook attempts to become a bigger part of your online existence, the more concerned you should get because there’s a danger in being too tied and too connected with a single service that wants to know more of who you are and what you do. It’s the same reason why people should be cautious of tying themselves to tightly to Google and all the services it offers.

Despite Facebook’s growth, I have always been ambivalent about it. Facebook can’t be ignored because it has become too popular and useful as a communications and marketing vehicle. At the same time, it is important to remember Facebook has aggressive ambitions that may not always align with the needs or wants of its users.

At one time, AOL seemed unstoppable and invulnerable because it was so big and dominant. But that strong position didn’t last because as AOL pushed forward to hammer home its dominance, the online landscape shifted on it, and users found different and better ways to use the Web.

I’m not suggesting Facebook faces the same fate but the similarities can’t be ignored or denied.

The End of TechCrunch As We Know It

By Mark Evans in Blogs, M&A 2 Comments Tags: , , ,

With 24 hours to think about it, the sale of TechCrunch to AOL strikes me as a head-scratcher, even though TechCrunch founder Michael Arrington says it make complete sense. Of all the potential suitors, AOL would not have been on my list. Instead, it would have been headed by a digital publishers such as CNet or one of the large newspaper publishers such as the New York Times or Washington Post looking for a deeper digital presence.

The rise of TechCrunch into one of the technology industry’s most influential players is an amazing story. Started by Arrington, it was just one of many technology blogs battling for attention at a time when the technology market was just starting to re-emerge after the dot-com boom went bust. TechCrunch wasn’t an immediate smash-hit but Arrington’s energy and connections started to make it a must-read. In time, TechCrunch expanded with other Web sites and conferences, while Arrington became an active player in the Silicon Valley ecosystem.

While Robert Scoble suggests TechCrunch’s sales is the end of an era in tech blogging, it’s far more accurate to suggest it’s the end of an era for TechCrunch. Tech blogging will continue with existing players getting stronger, and new players emerging.

Meanwhile, TechCrunch will, no doubt, become a different creature. Sure, Arrington is going to stay involved with TechCrunch but the reality is it’s difficult, if not impossible, to maintain the same kind of involvement when you’re an employee rather than an entrepreneur putting your heart and soul into growing a business. While Arrington will be a good AOL employee for awhile, he’s an entrepreneur who will be lured by other activities and interests.

In time, TechCrunch’s influence will change as well. As much as TechCrunch has a large following, Arrington is the driving force behind what makes TechCrunch different from GigaOm, VentureBeat, Mashable and ReadWriteWeb. He is the TechCrunch brand.

Rather than being the end of an era for tech blogging, the landscape will start to shift and evolve. TechCrunch will likely remain a popular destination but the tech blogging landscape could become a more interesting place now that TechCrunch is part of AOL. With change comes opportunity – maybe even a new Arrington-like blogger with big dreams, great writing skills and a knack for self-promotion.

Not everyone may be a fan of Arrington but you have to give him huge credit for building TechCrunch into an online publishing powerhouse. As TechCrunch moves forward with a new owner, it will interesting to see how TechCrunch changes and, as important, how readers view the new TechCrunch.

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...