I'm on IM with Jordan Golson, and he's on the phone with TechCrunch editor Mike Arrington. You see, Valleywag sort of, um, fired Jordan this morning, and Mike got a bogus version of the story claiming it was all because of one post Jordan did criticizing his management. Jordan wants Mike to correct the article, saying that's not what happened at all — he was dismissed over much bigger issues. To my profound disappointment, Arrington just replied to him, "I can't go back on it now that I've written it." Sure enough, Arrington's updates to the post claim Jordan's explanations are "confusing" and full of "contradictions," rather than just admitting TechCrunch got told the story wrong, which seems easier. Now you know why Mike always insists that you not call him a journalist.
TechCrunch editor flubs story but "can't go back on it now"
12:40 PM on Wed Apr 16 2008
By Paul Boutin
2,566 views
19 comments












Comments
Silly little fat man. So self-righteous, so little to be self-righteous about.
What were the "bigger issues"?
Harry "did I miss a post?" Wang
You don't post much Paul. I was beginning to think you were fired too!
Arrington should admit his version of the story serves his personal grudge against Valleywag way better than the truth. That seems easier.
clear cut case of ginger related discrimination if you ask me...
You haven't given an explanation, so people will of course speculate. It's a pretty wuss move not even telling the person you fired, why you fired him.
@Dweezil: Ha, you reminded me of this Ricky Gervais bit with David Bowie:
+ Watch video
Fired ? You mean they pay you guys ?
Techcrunch is a joke. Why in the world does anyone listen to Michael Arrington? He has little credibility IMHO.
@colintoal: I always figured they got paid in iTunes gift cards that Paul likes to give away.
Jordan said I was boring. That probably got him fired.
The facts of the issue may be completely in VWag's favor but that's irrelevant to Arrington's world, where it would be unconscionable not to play up the coincidence between the April 1 post and Jordan's departure. In terms of journalistic "standards" Arrington's acting the same as ever: no better or worse than cable TV news, where there's no reason to let the facts, or a lack of them, get in the way of convenient speculation.
And his refusal to back down fits the form of our flawed media, too: scandals run on page one, subsequent corrections run on page C35 in agate type.
What the heck happened to Jordan? He was awesome!
@Nick Douglas: You must have a mind meld with me because that's exactly what I was referencing. I thought national disgrace and so depressed at being hated fatso takes his own life would be better served for the post about his eventual fall from grace (fall from mediocrity?). I forgot that it was pathetic little fat man instead of silly little fat man.
He is the clown that everyone wishes would die, though.
Arrington probably didn't want to change the post because his fingers are too fat for the keyboard.
Awwwwkward as this is, I suspect Valleywag just gave Jordan a pay raise.
Which one is the gossip rag, VW or TechCrunch?
SO HARD THE INTERNETS IS.
And I was just gonna start following Jordan, I swear!
The post was updated and now reads: "possibly based on a single critical post about his employer."
Now what we VWag readers want to know is why Jordan got fired. You can't honestly roll out all that drama and not give us the full picture. You've said too much or not enough.
C'mon. Give it up. The six-five-oh wants to know.
Start a discussion:
Login with your username and password below. Or comment on this post via email.
Forgot your username or password? New User?