Blogsplosion: Techcrunch, the WaPost and credibility

When Techcrunch announced last week it’s partnership deal to appear on the Washington Post website (see here) my first reaction was to fire off some emails to journalist colleagues and post a blog here on questions this raised for me about the relationship between blogs, even a blogger as influential as Michael Arrington, and mainstream news media.

My issue mainly was how the WaPo, which, whatever one thinks about its editorial line, has a deserved reputation for disciplined and credible reporting, could hook up with a blog that has a track record of running poorly sourced items that prove unfounded (see this on a report Jerry Yang would soon be ousted at Yahoo! or a similar piece on Ballmer getting offed at Microsoft).

Don’t get me wrong, I think these stories are the exception on Techcrunch, which is one of the most useful blogs around and is part of my hourly reading. But I take their “scoops” with a grain of salt. I don’t do the same with the Washington Post.

Today Arrington was full-on into one of his notorious spats with a competitor, in this instance Wired, over one of its writers’ expressed astonishment over the TechCrunch/WaPo tie-up — but on another issue: Arrington’s habit of writing about companies he has invested in. See here for the Wired piece, and here for Arrington’s reply and this for the take from Kara Swisher (who frequently calls Arrington out on misguided ’scoops’).

I’m still pondering all these things (as a recovering journalist with some 30 years of baggage in mainstream news media I’m hesitant to trust my instincts on these matters — which is why I didn’t write anything last week). But there is clearly food for thought in this and I’ll be watching the converation with interest in the coming days.