Hacker News Reader

Comment by ChuckMcM | Hacker News Reader

tl;dr version: The PR world is full of people trying to get an edge. TechCrunch is very aggresive and not loved by other PR people, and even by some startups or personalities. This makes the author sad.

I remember complaining to my parents about the 'cliques' in high school that were simultaneously desirable (since being 'in' was a positive) and despicable because they would go to great unscrupulous lengths to besmirch you if you crossed them (even if they only thought you crossed them). My mom, the psyche major in college, said "Chuck, you can only control the way you are, not other people. Be a good example and be a good friend."

So true and so unrewarding at the same time. The injustice of it all rankled that piece of me that rebelled against the "fairness" of it all. But there is no "fair" in politics. Wasting time worrying about that gets you no where.

View on HN

But it's important that these issues are discussed publicly. Here the point is not the embargo per se, but the fact that TechCrunch is deciding the embargo date, which might be really counterproductive for the startup, if it suddenly starts to get traction.

When I first started in the startup world, I was stunned how the whole PR ecosystem worked. It and it's ethics should be discussed more, not less, so that both readers and new startups understand it better.

Startups, like TechCrunch, are free to refuse to embargoes or even break them altogether if they think the extra publicity is worth more than building bridges with one media organisation.

Not all of the injustices of the world can be fixed by being "a good friend".

I would think part of you that rebel against injustice is something you should hold on to.

I think you can be controlled by as much as someone else controls what controls you. EG, you need to eat, someone controls your food, so they control you to the extent that they can get away with before their position of power is compromised. If you think you are free, think again, you are controlled by whatever choices come to you: when two people want A, then someone either gets B or nothing at all. But spiritually people don't really want A, they want freedom, and the foolish think they can get it by imposing tyranny. I have A (freedom), so you have B (tyranny). Or rather, I impose B on you (tyranny), therefore I have A (freedom) by default. Wrong - it's not true freedom, freedom transcends A and B.

Huh? The quote was "you can only control the way you are", not "you have complete control over yourself".

Of course you are influenced by external factors, but you still choose how you respond to them but have only indirect, at best, control over others.

Huh? No kidding. You think I misread it?

Is the author really wasting time worrying about this? TechCrunch's market power seems a lot less permanent to me than the existence of cliques in high school. Enough negative stories like this one can cost TC enough readers and enough influence that it is no longer the dominant source of news about the startup community, and can't push around young companies any more. That sounds like a real change in the world that would be great for startups, and not a waste of time ta all.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com