Category: Technology Author : Steven Hodson Posted: December 10, 2008
Tags : Drama 2.0, ethics, mashable, old boy's network, techcrunch
The business of Social Media and the new old boy’s network
Just to make sure we have the parameters of this discussion straightened out right from the beginning there are two aspect to this whole social media rigmarole. The first aspect is the actual online world that is social media. It is about interaction with others using a wide ranging set of tools and services. That is not what this post is about.
The second aspect is the business of social media. From the promotion of services and software through to the funding of social media type start-ups this is a multi-million dollar business. Hell it could be a multi-billion dollar business if you fall for the paper valuation of stuff like Facebook. At its core though this business of social media is a relatively small group of very rich and/or powerful people.
Part of this inner circle are a number of equally powerful bloggers who have done very nicely for themselves off of social media – the online environment. While their blog properties carry an immense amount of weight both in the environment; and the business side, it is the names of the people involved with those blogs that are the real cash.
The problem is that this real A-List of social media power brokers is really no different that the old boys network that surrounds old media; or even old business. Even though the idea of blogging is about openness, transparency and disclosure this new old boy’s network practices something much different.
A perfect case in point is the news surrounding Circle of Moms. On December 4th two post written by authors that weren’t really associated by the respective blogs wrote about the amazing numbers that Circle of Moms was getting. Now Circle of Moms originated as a Facebook application but in October launched a parenting website presumably built around the same concept as the Facebook app.
TechCrunch, one of the two sites referenced, brought Nick Gonzalez out of blogging semi-retirement to pitch the news about this wondrous event. The other blog to post about this was Mashable who had Jennifer Van Grove; a Social Media Strategist, write up their version of this ground breaking news.
And what was the news you might ask?
Well apparently since launching in October this mommy site had amazingly enough acquired 850,000+ members. The interesting thing is that this number is pretty close to the number of installed Circle of Moms widget on Facebook.
Now I am going through all this because what comes next is important and knowing some background will be helpful; I believe, in you being able to see what is happening.
Interesting enough on searching through Techmeme on the the day that these posts went live shows nothing as far as buzz happening. I looked through every hour after and it was until 3:50 AM EST that anything showed up. However it was enough to catch the eye of the blogger behind The Drama 2.0 Show who with some journalistic chops that old media would be proud of did some digging and fact checking on this news.
Now this is where this story starts to get really interesting so hang in there. In the case of TechCrunch and Nick Gonzalez there is some interesting undisclosed connections between Mr. Arrington, Gonzalez and the people behind Circle of Moms. It turns out that Nick Gonzalez works for a company called Social Media which bills itself as a social advertising network that sells ads for widget and application developers.
It also turns out that Social Media’s CEO one Seth Goldstein is friends with the founder of Circle of Moms – Ephram Luft. As well Naval Ravikant as investor in Social Media is an investor in Circle of Moms.
So what is the take away from this simple set of facts?
Nick Gonzalez is an employee of Social Media for which he is probably getting a nice paycheck. Social Media his employer pays him as a result of money invested in them by the same person with interests in Circle of Moms. Now tie this in with the fact that Ravikant, Goldstein and Luft are listed as friends of Michael Arrignton on Facebook which as The Dramma 2.0 Show blog shows Mr. Arrington has a personal connection with all the people involved.
Does any of this matter?
It wouldn’t matter one bit if Arrington through his ownership of TechCrunch and association with the involved parties has publicly declared his conflicts of interest in this. After all isn’t that the most basic tenet of this new media – disclosure and transparency. Well we didn’t see any of that here and this isn’t the first time that questions have been raised about this type of thing with TechCrunch.
Now what about the other shoe – how about dropping it now?
This one isn’t as complex a circle as with TechCrunch but as The Drama 2.0 Show blog found out Mashable isn’t without some ethical questions that need to be asked.
For example the writer of the wondrous news as it appeared on Mashable is one Jennifer Van Grove who as she says on her own site – a community and social media consultant (a cutsey phrase for marketer). So it is her business to write posts like this and wouldn’t you know it she’s listed as a friend of Luft on Facebook.
However one has to point out as well that Pete Cashmore; like Mr. Arrington, is listed as a friend of both Luft and Ravikant as well on Facebook.
As with TechCrunch this involvement by Mashable’s owner Pete Cashmore and new writer Jennifer Van Grove with people surrounding Circle of Moms is something that was never disclosed by anyone involved.
Perhaps this is all just a hinky coincidence?
Sure and I’ve got a bridge you might be interested in. While I’m not going to get my head sized for a tin foil hat by any means one has to really wonder what is being gained by two puff pieces about a website with some highly questionable numbers being bandied about. As many of the commenters on the TechCrunch post pointed out – the numbers don’t make sense.
For me though the more important point to possibly be made here is how the business of social media is potentially being manipulated. Sure Facebook is all about networking and increasing your number of friends. What it shouldn’t be is a meeting ground of the social media power set so that they can create possible false impressions of success or failure because behind all this some-one’s money is being screwed with.
Not to mention that the very people we want to believe in this new media – our readers – won’t appreciate being played like this. Which means we pay the price and the whole basis of what the social media environment is based on is screwed.
But hey – the rich get richer, the powerful get their ego’s fed and the new old boy’s network will continue to grow.







Dec 10, 2008
Yep, Social media is just a fancier way of saying The Old Men's Club, except it appears to me more women are standing out in this industry than ever before. If there is anything new about it, its that there are far more influential women than ever before in history.
Dec 10, 2008
Rubbish, TechCrunch “is a weblog dedicated to obsessively profiling and reviewing new Internet products and companies.” Read that, “dedicated”, “obsessive”. Can't you see those dark circles under Mikey Arrg's eyes.
Ps – Any info on when TechCrunch “blacklists” startups? A reference to this was made on a previous post on inquisitr.
Dec 10, 2008
Just an FYI Luft added me as a friend only after I wrote the post, not that it matters or anything…
Dec 10, 2008
Seems like a bit of a stretch to suggest there is a major conflict of interest on our side because people are friends on Facebook – most people in this social media crowd you mention – like Pete – simply accept everyone that friend requests them. I believe Pete is actually at the 5,000 friend limit. And as Jenn notes, she wasn't even friends with Luft on there until after the article was published.
Finally, speaking of doing your homework, we've known each other a long time and you're on my Gchat list, feel free to send me a message when questions like this arise before publishing a conspiracy theory
Dec 10, 2008
The Techcrunch connection might raise an eyebrow, but where's the smoking gun? The Mashable side looks pretty circumstantial and less substantive than Techcrunch – there are Facebook friends and there are Facebook friends, which varying levels of privacy limiting access to more trusted souls, not that we can easily see that.
Sure, it's possible that one, the other, or both blogs are either doing favors or being compensated for their coverage, but I don't see a compelling case here, Steven. It could just as easily be that it was the case of a press release coming out and the two blogs both felt that the numbers being discussed were newsworthy.
Dec 10, 2008
I've never met Luft or Ravikant, as far as I recall, and certainly don't know them personally. Nor did I have any input in the writing of the piece you put forward.
Dec 11, 2008
I live in the Valley and know that Facebook friends don't mean much…people add each other as friends all the time and the tech industry isn't that big. Just because two people know each other, it doesn't mean that they're colluding on stories. Steve, since you are such a sleuth, what % of people that Arrington and Cashmore write stories about aren't friends with the two of them?
Second, the compete numbers seem to support their claims: http://siteanalytics.compete.com/www.circleofmo…. 563K uniques in November and 20 page views per user. Those numbers are impressive.
My theory is that Inquisitr published this story for two reasons. First, Duncan Riley, owner of Inquisitr, is still upset that he has fallen out of Arrington's good graces and takes any opportunity he can to last out at him. Second, the Inquisitr realizes that the only page views (read revenue) that they can generate are off of tabloids or gossip. Rather than practice journalism or publish well-researched findings, they choose to reblog some loser named Drama 2.0.
The scariest thing about blogs is that they give idiots like Steve Hobson a voice and spread misinformation around the Internet.
Dec 11, 2008
Social media is actually about breaking into the old boys network. Especially in the business world
It's about capturing peoples' imagination and building your own inner circle
Take a look at Digg for example. The posts that get the highest number of diggs really do not confom to any set of rules
Social media is big business these days
Look at the obama campaign. Long after the election it is still garnering great folowership on social bookmarking sites like digg, technorati and even face book
Dec 11, 2008
With the collapse of old media (e.g., newspapers, magazines, etc.), I think its important that new media (e.g., blogs) be more transparent and either behave more like journalists or make clear not pretending to be journalists. That is, either disclose any real or potential conflicts (as journalists try to do) or make clear you have chosen not to make such disclosures (not striving to be impartial). Doesn't look like mashable needed to disclose anything since I agree a “Facebook friend” is not real connection without more. Looks like TechCrunch can do a better job being more transparent.
Dec 11, 2008
Thank you Pete.
Dec 11, 2008
Wow .. thanks I really appreciate that glowing opinion. I'll make sure to print it out and tack it up on my wall. Mom would be so proud.
Dec 15, 2008
So did any moms actually create Circle of Moms?