« Previous Post
Next Post »

Why I Love Techdirt

September 30, 2006 at 05:22 | Print This Post Print This Post

Even though I often think they don’t give enough credit to the rest of the internet, fixated as they often are on links to themselves, Techdirt has the market cornered on reality checks and the diligent puncturing of the worst of corporate bloviation and self-importance. The latest concerns yet another trademark case on google Adwords. Nobody can do it quite as well as Techdirt. Update: Eric Goldman’s take on the case is here.


RSS Feed

4 Responses to “Why I Love Techdirt”


  1. Mathew Ingram (45 comments.)
    September 30th, 2006 at 12:04

    I love Techdirt too. I just wish they would link to someone other than themselves a little more often. That kind of thing really gets on my nerves.


  2. Mike Masnick (4 comments.)
    September 30th, 2006 at 16:14

    Rob, Mathew,

    First off, thank you for the kind words about Techdirt. It’s always very much appreciated.

    As for the linking issue, I’d like to clarify.

    We ALWAYS link to outside sources. Every one of our articles is based on an outside source, and that is always the core element of each post, and we always link to that source. There are plenty of times when we will link to multiple outside sources as well. There is not a post on Techdirt (other than the very, very, very rare administrative posts) that doesn’t link to an outside source.

    However, we do link back to ourselves for a very good set of reasons. First, since we like to keep the posts short and sweet, we often use short hand (or offhand) phrases that we’ve explained before (e.g., “the captive audience is dead,” “innovation is different from invention,” “the Streisand Effect”) and it helps to link back to where we first discussed those, rather than go through the entire explanation again.

    We’ve found that when we *don’t* link back, we get angry complaints about how we don’t back up what we’re saying and make these statements with no support or explanation.

    Since we’re not a news source, but an analysis and opinion place, we’ve found that having the links back help show the overall trend and backup and enforce what we’re trying to say, without turning each article into a full length column. We’ve found that this helps us focus in on the core point of what we want to say with each post, while still being able to back it up with a lot more details than could otherwise be fit into the space.

    I’ll admit it’s a fine balance, and we don’t mean for it to be annoying or to get on anyone’s nerves — so I apologize if it upsets you. However, I do think we give plenty of outbound credit, though, I’ll be more conscious of this complaint going forward.


  3. Rob Hyndman (319 comments.)
    September 30th, 2006 at 17:40

    Hi Mike,

    Thanks for the comment. I hear what you’re saying, though frankly I think you’re underestimating your readers’ familarity with (and enjoyment of) your very distinctive style, and our memory for what has come before.

    Cheers,
    R.


  4. Mathew Ingram (45 comments.)
    September 30th, 2006 at 18:31

    Fair enough, Mike.

    And don’t get me wrong — I like what you guys do a lot, and almost always find it to be well thought out and well argued, regardless of where you link or don’t link. But more often than not I see posts that have five or six links, and only one of them is to an outside source and the rest are to previous Techdirt posts.

    I’m not saying that linking to those doesn’t have value, it just has a kind of overwhelmingly self-referential tone to it that bugs me sometimes, as though only Techdirt has anything worth saying on the subject.