Shooting at Bubbles

Last year SXSW brought us a communication tsunami in the form of Twitter so I guess expectations where equally high that this year’s incarnation of the festival would bring another revolution of some sort with it.

Well after a fashion I guess it did it that it showed how easy it was for a small number of twittering obnoxious techno-know-it-alls to get an otherwise boring interview with one of the most boring web people around blown out into a full burn the bitch at the stake affair.

As Michael Arrington quite rightly pointed out; with video to back him up, in a post today this so-called disaster of an interview of Zuckerberg by Sarah Lacy was anything but. Michael suggests that what it was in fact nothing more than a bunch of back of the room jerks who forgot they weren’t on digg.com and got overly enthusiastic with their twittering. To quote Michael

Here’s what I think really happened. There was an unruly group of attendees, mostly at the back of the session, who heckled Lacy (and Zuckerberg) during the interview. A few others joined in as well at different points. The heckling drew Twitters saying that some people weren’t happy with the interview. And then those Twitters spawned new ones, trying to outdo the previous ones. And then the “real journalists” jumped in head first and laid into Lacy, safe in the knowledge that they had Twitter messages to back them up.

What in the world drove these “journalists” to write this nonsense? Jealously over the fact that they weren’t on stage, or over Lacy’s new book? Perhaps they just got caught up in the fun of a witch burning. But whatever drove them to write those articles, it certainly wasn’t journalism. Nor was it professional. And, worst of all, it wasn’t accurate.

Michael isn’t the only one to take exception to this idiotic behavior as can be read in the interview that Brian Solis of PR2.0 did with Sarah after they put out the flames that were surrounding her

I offered my own advice to her when we sat together as well, and, she listened. It’s important to note that because it’s easy for anyone to react defensively. Instead, she simply listened and processed everything.

Did she make mistakes?

Sure. She’s the first to tell you that.

Could she have responded differently?

Sure.

If you think she owes you an apology or needs to fall on the sword for her Q&A with Zuckerberg, don’t hold your breath. Sarah Lacy doesn’t need to apologize to anyone other than Mark. But guess what? Even Zuckerberg supported the interview, so an apology is that last thing he wants. In fact, he empathizes with her.

I asked Sarah if anyone thought to get Mark’s take on this.
She agreed that it’s the story that isn’t getting told.

I saw Mark last night and I can tell you he’s not happy about the sweeping negativity against Sarah either.

It doesn’t matter that Robert Scoble suggests that the SXSW audience is unlike any other. That still doesn’t excuse lack of respect and believing that one’s own overblown ego gives you the right to be insulting and intentionally hurtful to anyone let alone some-one who was just trying to do a job that they had been hired to do and requested by the person who was being interviewed. I will say that Robert’s title for his post today on the matter is an equally perfect way to end a post – Audience of Twittering Assholes. You would have thought your parents would have taught you all better manners than what you showed to the world yesterday.

Update: I was just reminded that the same sort of thing happened at Gnomedex last year when the overblown ego’s thought what they had to say was more important that what was being spoken about on stage. Maybe they should start have signs at sign-in “Check ego’s at the door – collect them when you leave”.  Makes me glad I’m too much of an unknown or to poor to attend these things because it wouldn’t be the people on the stage that I would be telling to STFU.

[tags]SXSW, Keynote, Zuckerberg, Sarah Lacy, witch burning[/tags]