Skip to content

Comment on Michael Arrington: Editorial Independenceparent

Comments

Perhaps it is, but having a member of the senior staff also running an investment fund that invests in the very subjects of the TechCrunch site is a huge integrity issue. Armstrong seemed to be dodging the question to me, a way to avoid having to answer for what Arrington is up to.

I kinda see what you're getting at, but it doesn't really make any sense. Armstrong was actively working with Arrington on the fund. It wouldn't be answering for Arrington (or at least not just Arrington), but for himself and AOL as a whole.

This wasn't something that Arrington just announced out of the blue that AOL has to scramble to react to. Armstrong was active in setting the whole thing up, and AOL was investing in the fund. They knew this was happening way in advance, and announced it with Arrington. Then everything went to hell. To whatever degree this could possibly be construed as Arrington's fault, it must also be seen as at least equally AOL's fault.

I agree wholeheartedly on that last point - it's all of their fault for not making sure that a giant firewall existed between Arrington and TechCrunch as a part of this announcement.

AboutSource Built by g1lg1l

Hackerly is an independent reader for Hacker News, built on the public HN API. Not affiliated with Y Combinator.