Ask HN: Should TechCrunch Reveal Who Paid For Posts?

I want to add that he wrote a post about my company and product (Rocketbox, <a href="http://www.getrocketbox.com" rel="nofollow">http://www.getrocketbox.com</a>), but ABSOLUTELY NO COMPENSATION CHANGED HANDS. I would think that most of the companies he wrote about are in a similar situation, where they did nothing wrong but their article has also been deleted.<p>It's too bad this happened, I really hope he learns from this experience.

This kind of bribe is not technically a crime, it's just a violation of journalistic ethics. The way I see it, even if the company had offered the compensation, there's nothing wrong with the company doing everything it can to get itself coverage and press attention. It's on the journalist to uphold their own ethical standards.

I think this is a lot more common than folks realize. Links = SEO win. Links from important sites = lots more SEO win. With my tiny little blog I (weekly) get people emailing me offering to pay me small sums for a review or link.<p>edit: I want to make it clear right here and now that I will write about any company for a MacBook Air. :-)

I think this is much more common than you might expect. I don't like the idea of asking for compensation for a favorable mention, however is it all that different from when a company gives away their wares to someone unsolicited? I suspect that most people in that position will have their opinion slightly altered by the act of getting stuff for free. Many bloggers get stuff sent to them by various companies, some keep the items, others give it away to the readers.<p>So is asking to keep the item, or asking for an item all that much different? I guess its more overt from the author that they are after something, but if the author still maintains an objective viewpoint what harm is really done?<p>Can you really trust the product opinion of someone who hasn't put out their hard earned cash to acquire it? Amazon reviews in my eyes are much more powerful than something like Consumer Reports. What about you?

They didn't bribe him. He asked them for the bribe.<p>We dont know what happened in the past (one prior incident is mentioned) so without knowing the details it's hard to even begin to make a judgement. :)

Did the company do anything wrong really though?

Whatever transpired could have been far more subtle than, "gimme macbook, get story". For example:<p>"So glad to meet you. So happy to be your friend. Is there any way we can help each other out as friends? I love to help people out. I can give slots at my conferences, and I know a lot of bright kids looking for unpaid internships, and oh by the way I do some writing for TechCrunch too. Do I need any help? Well, I always want to hear about good story ideas and meet other interesting people. As my boss Michael Arrington has said, send us scoops and we'll think fondly of you and be more likely to report on you later! Also my side projects are hurting for equipment. You know, Company X gave us a projector when our old one broke. Why, yes, that was the company I wrote about on TC last month."<p>That is, the behavior could have been on the same continuum of "we know everybody, we trade favors, the old rules of fastidious disclosure of every slight-conflict-of-interest can't possibly work in this new world" that Arrington himself has used to defend his own practices. The companies that <i>did</i> 'pay' may have thought of it as just cementing an important friendship, not an explicit quid-pro-quo. Brusilovsky may have gone too far, but in the ways 17-year olds often do, because they understand only some of the patterns of their role models, without all the subtleties and limits.<p>That would explain both Brusilovsky's vague 'mistakes were made' and 'a line were crossed' phrasing and TC's reluctance to be more specific in allegations or shaming the favor-traders.

they already did..see update blog post pointer