Scobleizer - Latest Comments in Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Wise Startup Blog — Fri, 13 Feb 2009 08:49:49 -0000

With money comes corruption, no question about it.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Joe — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 14:28:49 -0000

"You mean the same site that says: “(Ford, at that time, had a hired army complete with spies which would invade workers’ homes to make sure they were living as good Christians, and beat them if they were suspected of union sympathies or were caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.)” Yeah! Right."

What, you have a problem with reality? Look up "ford thugs beat workers" and you find:

http://www.hfmgv.org/rouge/...
http://www.nytimes.com/2005...
http://books.google.com/boo...

It's not hard to find such things. It's hard to find people who don't idolize the man Hitler credited with creating the ideas behind Nazism (in Mein Kampf if you ever feel like looking it up.)

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

James Whatley — Thu, 27 Mar 2008 08:22:24 -0000

Hi Robert,

S'funny - really liked your post. The stuff about the evolution of bloggers and the tiered system that has sort of developed over the years.

I hosted a table for bloggers at a recent SpinVox event in the UK and one of the 'bloggers' was slightly put out as she 'normally' got invited along to things as PRESS.

When does a blogger become a journalist?

What typifies and defines 'a' blog?

Stuff I'm kicking around internally at SpinVox HQ and also over at SMSTextNews.com.

The editor there, Ewan Macleod just posted this article about how valuable his time is at CTIA next week.

Thought you might like to read it - raises some interesting points.. similar to (but not the same as) the ones that you talk about.

http://www.smstextnews.com/...

Cheers,

James.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Christopher Coulter — Sat, 22 Mar 2008 17:18:56 -0000

"That is well said," replied Candide, "but we must cultivate our garden".

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Prokofy — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:07:25 -0000

Yes, that's all good, it's very noble and inspiring, but then, well, CNET does need to die, too.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

drstarcat — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 15:24:18 -0000

Just did a post about a conversation I had with Doc Searls at http://drstarcat.com with the same themes. Pretty easy to get caught up in all this stuff.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Bob — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:44:02 -0000

@95 You mean the same site that says: "(Ford, at that time, had a hired army complete with spies which would invade workers' homes to make sure they were living as good Christians, and beat them if they were suspected of union sympathies or were caught in the wrong place at the wrong time.)" Yeah! Right.

Be that as it may, if their motto has since changed, it's likely because they achieved their original goal in beating GM.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Alex Hammer — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 11:36:07 -0000

Michael Arrington’s Rant - Good but What’s Missing? The User
http://techleaders20.blogsp...

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Scabr — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 09:36:50 -0000

Create.Don't beat.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Robert Scoble — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 02:01:54 -0000

Ankesh: is that really true? According to this site, Toyota's motto is: "innovation into the future." http://www.toyoland.com/toy...

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Ankesh Kothari — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 01:57:06 -0000

Toyota's motto was: Beat GM. Simple. And effective. An internal motto like "Beat CNET" is quite effective because it leads TechCrunch to become better than CNET in everything CNET does by benchmarking them.

I agree that Beat CNET shouldn't be the only goal. They should have a bigger vision than that. But it is a good internal motto to have to build motivation.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Alan — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:58:57 -0000

™"If Kennedy had said “Let’s go beat some Commies!” we would have had a space program whose only ardent supporters would have been the John Birch Society. Was there an underlying need to get there before ‘them’? Sure. But if sold that way it would have been dead on arrival."

With all due respect, you couldn't be more wrong. Conversely if Kennedy had said "Let's go to the Moon, THAT would have been dead on arrival, because people wouldn't have seen the purpose. You have to factor in what was going on in the world. Economically, militarily, socially, we HAD to get there before the Soviets. Otherwise, we would likely still have a wall up in Berlin, among other things. It would have set the US back on a number of levels. Had we not focused on getting to the moon in such a relatively short period of time, I'm guessing today we'd be waiting another 10 years for an iPhone and other technology we take for granted today.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Joe — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 00:54:45 -0000

The best post I have read since on this scobleizer.com

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Siggers Nation — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:27:54 -0000

We didn't build Hubble to beat the Chinese? Please, Scoble.

You may be right on that point, but we did build Hubble to beat the Moldovan Space Periscope, which would have been able to literally see around the curve of the universe and zoom in on the back of our head. Twice.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Chris — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 21:00:07 -0000

Scoble, you are incredibly narcissistic and shallow. Your self-inclusion in geekdom does a disservice to geeks. You clearly fail to grasp the most elementary aspects of major historical events, and you conflate your station in life with an important linkage to important moments in our shared contemporary history. Your self-serving blog is absolutely nothing more than mental and emotional masturbation. You contribute nothing to the larger dialog and zeitgeist, and that is why other sites have soared while yours has stagnated.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Stevey — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 19:02:00 -0000

And we didn't go to Iraq because......

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Aep528 — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:57:59 -0000

I didn't read every comment, but I haven't read any that caught onto your comments about being laid off. That is the core of why blogging is where it is today, and why it has become professional.

Tech blogging exploded because it was boosted by laid-off people WITH ACCESS. This is an important point. Laid-off people no longer have a conflict of interest, but they still have a PDA (going back a few years, here) full of contacts, friends they made along the way in the industry. That's a very important point that seems to have been missed. Unless, you have a contact, a friend of a friend, you're not going to get the product demos, or see the term sheets, or confirm a rumor. That's why blogging became professional - the people with access got real stories, and that led to higher page views, which led to higher bandwidth and hosting costs, which led to advertising, which led to hiring staff to maintain the level of information flow needed to generate even higher page views.

The only way blogging will return to the way it was would be another significant bust. Otherwise, it will continue along the current path of becoming traditional media.

And by the way, were you serious when you asked why the government didn't prevent the boom/bust cycle? Private companies, private capital, poor business plans, overspending, poor execution - what does the government have to do with any of that?

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Workpost — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:40:04 -0000

I like the idea of building something and not tearing things down. It's hard to build something innovative or new that will grow because it has value but it's a noble calling to try.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Sachin Balagopalan — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:35:18 -0000

It's all about having a conversation as far as I'm concerned...

http://tinyurl.com/2zo8sv

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

francine hardaway — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:32:47 -0000

Hmmm...do you need another comment on this post? Not only do I agree with you and love you for posting it and wading through the comments on it, but I believe blogging as a standalone business will ultimately not make it, because the MSM turns on blogs daily. BUT blogging can 1)bring you new friends/contacts, 2)start world-changing movements, 3)call out despotic governments, 4)expose criminals, 5)build bridges, and 6)educate people. That should be enough value for a single activity.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Douglas — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:30:47 -0000

@Seth: perhaps it tells us something else: if you want to market an idea, to get people to wake up at 6 a.m. in the morning, is to wrap up your idea in a warm bigger-purpose blanket - even if what you're thinking is: "shit, the Russians beat us into space, where can we go to trump that?"

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Michelle Greer — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:24:30 -0000

Why does CNET have such a big audience? They review products that aren't exclusive to early adopters. I can find reviews of crappy phones and the latest and greatest phone. The only reviews CNET offers on software are on Office and anti-viral software that the majority of computer users need. It doesn't bother to appeal to industry geeks.

The average person does't find the need to live the iPhone hugging, Twirling, Seeismic channeled existence that TechCrunch readers crave. They just want a phone that will allow them to text Jason Castro into American Idol rock stardom and a camera that won't screw up their vacation pics. Where do they go? CNET.

TechCrunch can cover the latest and greatest cars or those cool Japanese robots, and every other product that appeals to the kind of person who just has to be the first to have, know and do everything tech. CNET is a different beast entirely. Arrington would either have to create another site entirely (which is not a bad idea) or destroy what makes TechCrunch cool to compete with its mass appeal.

So there's your mission: come up with another site that my 72-year-old dad can frequent when he needs to buy a new digital camera, and then let him know it's out there. I don't even know why Michael Arrington worries about CNET.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

TonyLa — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 18:20:58 -0000

"Wozniak and Jobs didn’t start Apple to beat IBM. No, they wanted a personal computer for themselves and their friends"

Wozniak maybe, I'm not convinced that was Jobs motivation. There is a man who competes on every level.

Blogging hasn't lost its way, there's just more of it and like with everything else, the bigger names attract more attention. Livejournal, which is a community, is still thriving.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

Paul Chaney — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:57:44 -0000

Robert, I've been reading your blog for a long time and have to say this is one of the best posts you've ever written imho. Real wisdom and perspective here from someone who's been around a long time (so far as blogging years are concerned).

To all your final points, I say "YES!" I'm all about building community and having a higher purpose than just making money. I've yet to see a hearse with a U-Haul in-tow behind it.

Re: Mike Arrington’s dream team has wrong goal

adapar — Thu, 20 Mar 2008 17:33:39 -0000

First, let me thank you for giving us an enjoyable, inspiring and thoughtful post. Second, I will go out on a limb here, as my point of view is a bit narrow at this moment, and comment.

Blogging around the world seems to be (loosely) following the same pattern you described. Most of the spanish-based blogs I read thrive on fun first and foremost, while social and intellectual concerns come next.

However, I think the profesionalization of spanish-based blogging veers away from the pattern: it looks like corporate interest is negative rather than positive and, I think, bloggers as a group are learning from the experiences you describe. If that is true, it's another example of the power of building the systems you point out in item 3.

Finally, I believe that most people and thus most entrerprises (in the sense of embarking in new ventures) don't have clear goals even if they say so. Most of the time initial goals are just attempts to pin down the feelings that motivate us to move into the unknown, not fixed references that define the journey.