6 Comments »
Any good journalist knows that in order to get close to a company and its executives, there is a fine line when managing your relationship and you need to be careful about just how critical you are publicly. Somebody should of taught that to Simon Garfield who interviews Mark Zuckerberg in an article for the Guardian. Perhaps Simon Garfield doesn’t want to interview Mark Zuckerberg again but if he did, there’s a pretty good chance he lost his second chance.
As Caroline Waxler points out, Garfield starts the article with “I was told not to expect a human whirlwind, but when Mark Zuckerberg walks into the room there is barely a breeze.” That’s only the beginning. The reporter drops little insults about Zuckerberg throughout the article. Rather than rehashing each insult, I’ll let you read the article but suffice it to say, Garfield isn’t too kind in his take on Zuckerberg and Facebook.
The media’s fascination with Mark Zuckerberg and Facebook is not surprising. Microsoft invested in the company at a $15 billion valuation and the company continues to have a soaring user base which has surpassed 120 million users. The tone of the article is pretty clear: how can this less than intimidating 24-year-old be running one of the largest and rapidly online media sites in the world?
One thing that Garfield highlights that I partially sympathize with is Zuckerberg’s fascination with “sharing”. If you’ve heard Mark speak at conferences around the country (and world), you would have heard about Facebook’s mission of helping the world share with each other. After you hear it enough, you realize that sharing is caring and Facebook is all about it.
Why is message so simple? Well do you think Zuckerberg is going to tell you about all the internal monetization tests the company is running or about usage trends? Definitely not and if I was running a company like Facebook I’d spend a ton of time playing with all the data which rests at my fingertips. I would guess that many people working at the company are the same way and while it may be one of Zuckerberg’s favorite things to do, he can’t talk about it with journalists.
As such the message is always the same: “Facebook is about making it easier for people to share information with their friends.” Sounds good to me! Now we have to wait and see what monetization solution the company comes up with. Hopefully that comes along soon.
Mark Zuckerberg photo by Phil Fisk for The Guardian
I personally did not find the write-up offensive. No clue what you are talking about. It was frank, cheeky, descriptive, and spot-on.
Nick, that first paragraph is genius!
I’ve never seen a c-list blogger so perfectly distill why they will never ever reach mainstream status -
Readers want you writing for them, on their behalf, for their interests, in their defense (if such defense is needed).
You just admitted to be in the can for Facebook so that *YOU* could get that key “2nd interview”. NM the fact that FB is now trying to monetize “virtual gifts” in the middle of the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
I’ve met you in person Nick, and I know you’re better than this FUD. How about some real journalism - for the betterment of your readers instead of yourself??
@mem … you can’t put your full name? How do you determine the difference between B-list and C-list? I didn’t realize I was so privileged as to make you C-list.
Lol .. well I think that there is a fine line between being critical of a company (which you know I am and that’s why you would read this blog) and insulting their executives.
If you’ve read this blog for the past year, you know that I’m fairly critical of Facebook and honestly, I don’t consider myself highly biased, aside from the fact that I enjoy using their product.
@nick, I didn’t mean to say C-list - that was rude and unfair - you’re actually a very good blogger (which is why I took the time to speak my mind - if you weren’t, I never would have read nor even replied
That said, this post was not your best insomuch as it puts front and center the *central question* facing journalists today:
Whose side are you really on??
If what you’re really after is a big exclusive with Zuck - so be it - but that imo would be selling yourself incredibly short. You’ve got the skills to tackle some major issues man
Tough times offer tremendous opportunities to those daring enough to ask the fair but tough questions. So far, I see very little of that going on with respect to the virtual gift-world that has slowly but surely taken hold in response to the financial meltdown.
If respected bloggers like you don’t call for the major players to push real value creation instead of short-term ‘money for nothin’-ism - who the heck will??
Definitely agree..
As I said I try to be objective but I still firmly believe that insulting an executive in your article is not going to result in further interviews, period. While it wasn’t flat out insults, they were snide comments with a negative connotation. Obviously, if I were writing about let’s say a president that I don’t like (haven’t seen any of those recently
) I would also be critical of their actions.
If it’s a public figure you’re interviewing it is fair to be critical but to interview them and then insult them isn’t good politics.
Unfortunately journalism involves political wrangling and while I may like to walk around criticizing everybody about the poor job they are doing, it doesn’t accomplish much. As such, you won’t see many celebrities or public figures who are insulted by Howard Stern end up on the Howard Stern show just because he has millions of listeners.
It starts off a bit strange, with the reference to Ginger hair but the rest of the article actually gives him a great deal of praise. Opening paragraph was def. a strange start though. I never knew Mark was short?