Mike Arrington comes clean about Sam Sethi
I hate to say it, but if Mike is telling the truth (and I have no reason to believe he isn’t), then Sam Sethi acted even more unethically than I previously believed. I’m very, very curious to hear Sam’s side of the story.
BTW, Sam’s email to Mike (if Mike hasn’t fabricated it, and again, I have no reason to believe that he has) about launching an event to compete with Le Web directly contradicts some of the comments in response to my post, which claimed that the event(s) Sam was promoting would have covered significantly different ground and wouldn’t have been a threat to Le Web.
Like I said, I’m hoping Sam comes out with his response soon. I’ve always got on with him and enjoyed his company, so it’s a little weird to read these allegations from Mike, especially after the pretty alarming (but probably not consciously unethical) actions he took last week.
Filed under: Life
Hi Jackie, I have responded and I am amazed at both Mike’s post and yours. I have met you on several occasions and as you say we have got on but to say “Sam Sethi acted even more unethically than I previously believed.”
I am bitterly dissapointed as I have made it clear, I never took any money and the events mentioned are public record on TCUK prior to the final post on TCUK. I didn’t like Le Web and said so. i did not want to remove a personal comment that acted me publically and blogged about what was coming next in the UK. It also mentioned in the post how hard it is to do events and how I thought Loic had done well to organise such a large event and that I might be in his place, if the events coming up (those that were already announced) also failed to deliver. That is it period. nothing more nothing less. Mike’s accusations are both inflammatory and a good case for defamation. All of the sponsors will happily confirm that NO money has been exchanged and that in fact I am very much out of pocket for other events and expenses I paid for personally. Mike has fabricated this and I am now getting really pissed off with this whole thing to the point where I am seeking legal advise because it is beyond the pale now! :evil:
Why be so coy? You hope “Mike is telling the truth”, but put it in bold. He’s ‘coming clean’ is he? Why don’t you just call Sethi a crook and have done with it? And, hell, why wait for Sethi’s response before blogging all this? Who cares about context, or even emailing Sam - who you claim to know - for a response. Just join the TechCrunch culture - blog first, ask questions later. All the best in your new career as investigative journalist.
Mike Butcher, I suspect you’ll wish you’d have thought twice and posted once before your howler of a comment, so…no reply from me.
Sam, I’ve been out for the last ten hours, so eager to read your response. You read my initial post, which posited that your blogging about your own events was a clear conflict of interest in light of your Le Web comments, so no idea why you’d be ‘amazed’ by my post.
I am amazed because basically you are saying/agreeing/implying I stole $17k from Mike Arrington. “if Mike is telling the truth (and I have no reason to believe he isn’t), then Sam Sethi acted even more unethically than I previously believed.”
Here’s a quick newsflash Mike isn’t telling the truth! I have explained where the money is and guess what, if he doesn’t tell the truth about that you might like to consider what else he might have fabricated.
Jackie, I’m with Sam and Mike on this one. Unusually, I think your post was somewhat misguided. I mean, why has this got anything to do with us now? It’s stuff Mike should have kept private and dealt with directly with Sam.
Jackie. I really like you’re blog and style. You take no prisoners. I genuinely look forward to meeting you and having a decent conversation about all. This all I can say now, however, is that I, personally, have declared peace on all this. It’s time to disarm, and get on with life. Will say more mon my blog. Bye.
Sam, I should have been more clear: I wasn’t referring to the money allegation. I was referring to the email Mike quoted, where you made quite clear you were looking to run a rival event to Le Web. Nothing wrong with that in itself, but in the context of your post about Le Web, a clear conflict of interest. You’ve commented before that you didn’t consider what you were doing on Techcrunch UK to be journalism, but you don’t need to be in journalism to need credibility and trust with your readers. We can agree to disagree on the ethics of your conflict of interest - frankly, I don’t think you were conscious of the breach (as I said quite clearly in my post) - but I think these things matter. Like I said, I don’t think you blogged anything but your true opinion on Le Web, but appearances do count and so I understand completely Mike taking issue with your second post about putting your money where your mouth is. (And, as I said in my first post, I also still think Mike was dead wrong to offer to delete Loic’s comment.)
Readers of UK Techcrunch complained about Le Web 3 and begged him to proceed with the events he’d already muted on the blog. Sam then wrote a “Putting my money where my mouth is” post. Sorry, but I’m stuggling to see the conflict. He listened to his readers. Isn’t that what bloggers are supposed to do?
No.
:mrgreen:
Great last word, Jackie. All in all, I just think that Michael needs to bring in a crisis firm or PR person, no matter who or what is right or wrong.