Conversation Agent - Valeria Maltoni - New Media GigaOM Om Malik's Reporting Better Than WSJ


Book Reviews

  • Recommended Books
    Conversation Agent participates in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program.

As seen on

Advisory Boards

Comment Policy, Social Guidelines

  • Critical discourse is welcomed. I reserve the right to delete inappropriate comments. See my social guidelines.

« Whose Party is it Anyway? | Main | Acts of Kindness: Make the Impossible Possible »



It's a valid question. Do you hold yourself accountable? Clearly we put forth opinions and ideas that are biased for being filtered through us. We also publish information that might be incomplete or not researched. What caught my attention in Malik's posts are the fresh language and the smart questions.

By contrast, the post at the WSJ read washed out, a mere addition to the PR. Does risk enter the equation. Absolutely. A more established business has much more to lose. then again, I have nothing to base that kind of comparison on for GigaOM.

As a blogger I put forth what I deem the result of my education, experience, information at hand and thoughts on issues and information. I do the same at work hen I recommend one course of action to another. The difference is that here the checks and balances are offered live by readers who take the time/care to join the conversation. At work we have the team (or committee, depending on protocols).

Maybe the real question then is: Is the output different? You bet. What do you think? Is the way you conduct yourself in your day job different than how you operate in your blog? Why?

While Om may be building both substantial reach and an audience, do bloggers really have the same amount of responsibility and personal liability as mainstream media?

Valeria, as a blogger, do you hold yourself to a higher standard on your personal blog or in your more "traditional" publishing career?

We would need to ask Om Malik why he used that expression or hyperbole ;-) Sometimes we make sweeping statements to help the reader stop and consider what we're saying more closely. I'm not implying that's what he did, of course.

I stopped reading the WSJ when I switched from risk management to manufacturing. For some reason I had to read more trade publications and there was little time left. I suspect that what you describe with the Journal is what happens when companies are run by people who think they can cut their way to greatness.

To paraphrase a saying, one cannot solve a problem with the same thinking that created it. It needs different thinking. Cutting or letting sales run an organization are not strategies. They are short term stop gaps. This is in general. I have no idea how the WSJ is being run.

The comments to this entry are closed.