Valleywag Crosses the Line

by Karoli on May 11, 2007

Michael Arrington is often the target of sarcastic criticism by Valleywag, largely due to his success with Techcrunch and occasional online tantrums. Usually the articles target Arrington himself or some scuffle that he’s in with others around the blogosphere. Today, Arrington announced some new additions to the Techcrunch 20 Conference Expert Panel; namely, Caterina Fake, co-creator of Flickr, Rajeev Motwani, professor of computer science at Stanford and MC Hammer, the rapper-turned-entrepeneur. I applaud Arrington and Jason Calacanis (partner in the Techcrunch 20 Conference planning) for including people on the panel from diverse backgrounds and perspectives on the Internet.

Valleywag, on the other hand, chose to report Arrington’s announcement with a healthy dose of gender and race baiting, which in my opinion, goes way beyond the pale. Calling MC Hammer Arrington’s “token black man” is nothing more than a cheap shot intended to offend others. And it has. This middle class suburban white-bread white woman is pissed off that in this day and age, there’s still the need to belittle and denigrate African-Americans. Not content to stop with the title, the article goes on to describe Fake and Motwani as “another Indian, a half-Filipino woman…”

I debated calling attention to their despicable and weak attempt at racist humor, but ultimately decided that not saying something about it would feel like giving permission to them to write whatever they wanted, no matter how hurtful and nasty it might be. This is not about political correctness. This article is so rude, so offensive, and so out of left field that letting it stand without at least a counterpoint is just wrong.

The baiting is justified at the end of the article with this weak argument:

Rajeev Motwani and Caterina Fake are eminently qualified; but MC Hammer? That’s just ludicrous tokenism.

Well damn. Isn’t social media about the COMMUNITY, the USERS? Why wouldn’t you want someone on the panel that can come at it from that standpoint and who is currently advising a startup company? It’s only tokenism in your mind, Valleywag. And if Motwani and Fake are eminently qualified, why not describe them in those terms instead?

Valleywag, you suck. Unsubscribed.

Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Sphere: Related Content

  • Share/Save/Bookmark

Tagged as: Community, Internet

  • Nick Denton is nothing but a sensationalist tabloid hack. He's a complete gobshite with no journalist foundation to any of his articles which is how he tries to gain readership. He thinks by inciting rows (check out his latest trolling post) he'll up the circulation at valleyrag.
  • Mike
    I think really that the question is whether MC Hammer has ever done anything to prove he's worthy of being on the panel of experts other than adding a "colorful" voice... nothing wrong with that, but what exactly is he an expert in that has to do with qualifying him to judge these start-ups? I the idea of him being there actually, but I wouldn't call him an expert. Therefore I agree that it could be seen as a token.
  • Why not wait until after the conference to pass judgment on whether Hammer is a worthwhile speaker? Who knows, he might be entertaining and/or insightful. Stranger things have happened.
  • So Nick, who's really being "politically correct" here? You claim that adding diversity to the panel is tokenism, but not adding diversity to the panel is typical inbred culture thinking. There doesn't seem to be a way to please you at all. If their photos hadn't been splashed under the Benetton ad (and what is that all about anyway -- what does the ad have to do with the article?), would you have criticized Techcrunch for not publicizing them the way others have been?

    Here's the Panel Profile Page. Same size photos, same size bios. Nothing different whatsoever. So what exactly was your issue with having them in a blog post announcing the addition?
  • Where's the Valleywag link?
  • If the race and gender qualifications of the three additions had nothing to do with their selection, why emblazon their faces, like a multi-ethnic Benetton ad, across the top of Techcrunch? Everybody knows that these panels, and lists of top people in tech, are adjusted, often as an afterthought, to promote diversity. You think that's the solution to Silicon Valley's inbred culture?
  • This isn't about political correctness, and I'm not as clueless as you think. Why'd you choose out Hammer? Why'd you describe the others as "eminently qualified", AFTER describing them in terms of their race. Does Caterina Fake's gender and genetic composition have one damn thing to do with her qualifications? If they don't, why bring it up?

    Look, we all know the old saw about Silicon Valley being "whitebread soft" and all that. But you allege tokenism only with regard to Hammer and not anyone else. That's race-baiting, pure and simple.
  • calm down, nick. We just think he'll add a lot to the conversation. No need to make this a race war.
  • You really are as clueless as Michael Arrington when it comes to "diversity". The target of that item, as anyone who wasn't blinded by political correctness would realize, was not the token black man, but the all-white clique that so patronizingly drops a black man, any black man, onto a panel, so that they themselves look less monochromatic. If anybody thinks that meets some standard of race-blindness, they're deluding themselves. Yes, Valleywag belittles and denigrates: the dorky white guys when the wake up and remember they have to show diversity; and the unthinking commentators, who give even political correctness a bad name, such as you.
blog comments powered by Disqus

Previous post: In the Home Stretch

Next post: Scientology’s Favorite Bully Target Jailed Again