Opinion: Commenters on Michael Arrington's Techcrunch blog reproached him for being too Web 2.0-centric. But could he be right?Editor's Note: This story was updated to include comments from Tello's CEO, Doug Renert.
Today, the Internet attacked Michael Arrington. After he posted about Tello, which recently received a superfluity of press from Business Week and other outlets, visitors to his site eviscerated him for his supercilious posturing and general vainglory.
Michael's post insinuated that Tello wasn't hip to the blog news cycle: It didn't include blog posts under its Web site's news section, and it didn't have a company blog. He also noted that its news blitz came pre-launch, which is largely considered a no-no when a product is little more than vaporware.
A commenter mocked him in the first response to his post: "How dare they not involve the Web 2.0 intelligentsia!? You mean viral blogging isn't the end all and be all of new product introduction?"
That set off a comment dust-up filled with witty repartee and harsh invective. If you're a troublemaker or a Web 2.0 hater, it was probably fun to watch.
But I'm not interested in questions about Michael's motives for criticizing Tello, or whether he's jealous that Tello received good press without the benefit of Techcrunch, or whether he's exactly right in his opinion. I tend to agree with him more often than not.
The larger issue at play, an issue that was touched upon in the post's comments, is the position of blogs in the media news cycle.
It's an argument that's been rehashed ever since Ken Layne threw the rhetorical gauntlet. But it finds a bit of renewed vigor in the Web 2.0 market space, where blogs are sacrosanct and Michael is known as a kingmaker.
The underlying question is, can a "Web 2.0" company succeed without using "Web 2.0" marketing tactics? If so, what does that say about Web 2.0? About blogs? The conversation becomes even more difficult once you understand that there isn't even a consensus on what Web 2.0 means. What exactly are we talking about here?
So let's take a step from—or out of—the Web 2.0 bathysphere for a minute. Relax. Decompress. While we're sitting here, we can take an objective look at the myriad things blogs are good for:
- Breaking news headlines
- Opinion
- Conversation
- Exploration
Blogs carved out a niche between hard news and staid columns, a textual playground of sorts, and thereby changed editorializing and the news cycle. Blogs start what the mainstream press later polishes, and then blogs start again. It's the circle of life, Simba.
Click here to read Jason Boog's opinion on why corporate blogs can be boring, and how to fix them.
Blogging is important. In its niche topic areas—Web 2.0, AJAX, Hall and Oates fan clubs—blogging is especially important to early adopters. That audience consists of midlevel managers, senior IT people, and RSS omnivores like Robert Scoble (does Robert like Hall and Oates? I hope not). They're the audience responsible for this graph:
The idea about early adopters is that they provide the initial substrate that makes the eventual exponential adoption curve appear. So yes, they are important. And in the end, there's little to lose and a lot to gain by speaking to them using their tools and language.
But let's also take a look at what blogs are not so good at:
- Objective news analysis
- Detailed news stories and/or feature content
- Reaching and informing a mainstream audience (with the exception of sites like boingboing)
Blogging is not as important to another kind of audience. This audience probably signs your paycheck. They tend to be less interested in blogs and more interested in financial statements and financial newsletters that cost a year's salary to subscribe to. To paraphrase one of my favorite modern poets, they're the "guy behind the guy behind the guy." These guys are responsible for this graph:
I'm exaggerating a bit. There's certainly a great deal of overlap between the audiences for Techcrunch and Business Week. But I used Business Week as an example of a high-level press resource that reaches many, many more decision makers than Techcrunch does. And since it was a Business Week article that began this mess, it's even more apropos.
Why are some print journals bashing blogs? Read more here.
I don't know what Tello's motives were for starting its news blitz in the mainstream press. Maybe its marketing team is clueless. Or maybe it has a marketing objective that doesn't include blogs. Maybe they thought Business Week would provide the interested reader with more data about the company than the reader could get from a blog.
This is certainly possible. The Business Week article was about 960 words. Blog posts tend to be less. The Business Week article also included background information on Tello's market and interviews with Tello's executives. And the article focuses less on the technology and more on the business itself. Quite a contrast from what you'd normally find in a blog. And definitely a different focus from Techcrunch.
Blogs and news are complementary. Everybody knows this. Companies can and do launch without being hooked into the blogosphere, and they can be successful. We should all remember that, and make allowances for differences in approach and opinion.
P.S.: One day after this column was published, I spoke with Doug Renert, CEO of Tello, about its marketing strategy vis-a-vis blogs and mainstream media. Doug told me that Tello briefed reporters and a few bloggers prior to their launch on Monday, and that Tello considers both mainstream media and bloggers to be "valuable communities." Doug noted that blogs can actually clarify misconceptions printed in print media. The company is also considering beginning a blog, though right now resources for such an endeavor are not in place.
Tello updated the news section of their site to point to several blogs that covered them this week. Doug said they were planning to do this anyway, but the conversation in the blogosphere incented them to "move it higher on our priority list."
Web Design 
