Tech blogger Michael Arrington recently insinuated that TV personality Leo Laporte was predisposed to giving the Pre a positive review as he freely received a one-week evaluation unit from Palm Corporation. As you will see in the following video, Laporte does not handle this kindly; he is infuriated by an allegation that calls his reputation and journalistic integrity into question. While the Laporte’s ensuing language is strong, the video is worth watching.
Claims to fame
Laporte is the former host of The Screensavers and Call For Help programs on the now-defunct TechTV network. When TechTV folded, Laporte went on to start a weekly technology podcast called This Week In Tech (TWiT).
Being one of the first prominent television personalities to find value in the internet-only content distribution model, Laporte has been an innovator in podcasting. The TWiT podcast has grown in popularity and has ultimately become a full network of content that currently features fourteen regular shows.
Arrington is the founder of the prominent Techcrunch blog. Arrington’s venture has been online since 2005 and has been tremendously successful in building an empire surrounding a focus on Web 2.0 technology. Through humble beginnings it is estimated that Techcrunch now generates some $2.5 million USD a year in revenue.
Arrington is an occasional panelist on the TWiT Network and most recently appeared in the above episode of ZDNet contributing editor Steve Gillmor’s “Gillmor Gang” podcast hosted with the assistance of Leo Laporte.
A dose of perspective
I have been told on a number of occasions that I am a good conflict manager. People disagree and I arbitrate. I restore reason by pragmatically dealing with problems. I am not saying I am unemotional — that would not be entirely honest — but do I try very hard to take that deep breath before dealing with any conflict. There are times, though, where a man just has to say his piece, and I feel that this was one of those times.
Laporte has been an influential tech journalist for many years more than Arrington has even been in business. Laporte was there at the beginning of televised technology journalism and since then he has stood at the forefront of podcasting and interactive media.
A huge part of Laporte’s success has stemmed from his willingness to allow cross-promotion on his podcasting network. Laporte has gone so far as to have people with competing business interests contribute to his shows simply because he valued the relationship (such as Kevin Rose’s Revision 3). If there has been anyone more generous to fellow techies than Laporte, I honestly don’t know who it is.
Along comes Michael Arrington, obvious benefactor of Laporte’s generosity. Leo invites Michael to appear on the TWiT Network to expand the Techcrunch brand, and Arrington shows his gratitude by questioning Laporte’s ethics in front of his audience, on his own network! Anyone in similar circumstances would probably be infuriated. A few curse words for Mr. Arrington were certainly in order, and frankly, I would hope Laporte locks out Arrington and writes off Techcrunch to prove his point. Arrington had absolutely zero right to call his ethics into question, that’s the consumer’s job.
On trust and respect
Getting to the heart of the issue, it is clear that Leo is angry about a breach of trust. Laporte has spent his entire career building his reputation as a trustworthy source for unbiased, yet opinionated tech journalism. He has worked countless hours forging bonds of trust between himself and his listeners.
Without trust, TWiT is not a brand worthy of recognition in the mind of tech consumers, and that would ultimately be extraordinarily damaging to Laporte. That being said, the bonds Laporte has built are relatively strong, and it’s going to take more than a single fortunate Web 2.0 benefactor to detract from his well-deserved accolades.
It’s a reality that product reviewers, especially high-profile ones, often have the chance to freely evaluate a product for a limited time. This is a perk of the job, and it’s in the interest of the product’s vendor to build a reputation for their good.
However, it is the reviewer’s responsibility to relay the facts about the product to the consumer. Tech enthusiasts are a savvy bunch, and they will know when a reviewer makes blatantly false statements, or endorses what is seen to be a sub-par product. That reviewer is not going to be in business very long.
Consumers can and do police the tech review industry. I don’t think we need any help identifying the difference between a thoughtful review, a simple product endorsement, and a blatant distortion of the facts. We will figure it out ourselves, and if for some reason we feel cheated, it won’t take long for the word to get out.
The final word
Mr. Arrington’s commentary was not required, and it served no purpose other than to insult a man that has generously forwarded Michael’s business. The audacity in the suggestion that a veteran journalist like Leo Laporte would risk his reputation in exchange for an item that costs a few hundred dollars is not only insulting, it’s ignorant.
I hope Arrington will return to his rumors on Techcrunch and remember that communities like Icrontic and the Internet’s population of readers already serve to vet the honesty of a journalist and his or her work.
Articles RSS