Home > Commentary, Web Trends > Why Michael Arrington SHOULD Post Twitter Docs

Why Michael Arrington SHOULD Post Twitter Docs

July 15th, 2009
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_Qy4iftwk5JM/RdpHyroIklI/AAAAAAAAAPU/Acr8zmM5jk0/s400/breaking+news.gif

Picture via blogsopt.com

Today there is a hot debate going on around the Twitter confidential documents in Michael Arrington’s possession and whether or not TechCrunch should publish the information.

I don’t always agree with TechCrunch and its practices but with regards to this particular issue, I have to say I support Arrington’s view.  I think his proposal of omitting sensitive job interview records but posting other info is actually quite reasonable.  And he is also right in saying that journalists should strive to discover and disclose info that is previously hidden from or unavailable to the public.

The primary reason being, besides convenience in communication,  a major revolution the Internet has brought upon us is access to information.  Because it helps reducing information asymmetry, which is often the cause of unfair results from transactions — think KBB and how it’s helping all of us save money by providing us with information that are previously unavailable to car buyers.

So of course it is unlawful that the hackers invaded into Google Apps and stole the docs and they should be punished.  But now that TechCrunch has come into possession of such information, if not disclosed, it will give themselves (and others who have access) an unfair advantage over other market participants.  Even though it doesn’t seem like such an advantage would cause anyone any loss immediately, it does have potential to create market imbalances, e.g. if a Twitter app developer, having access to Twitter’s feature road map, can work ahead and give himself an unfair advantage over his competition.

Therefore, though there’s a gray area in between freedom and ethics within journalism, the society as a whole would benefit much from transparent disclosures.  For this reason, I think we should encourage Arrington to publish the information and all journalists to do the same when they face similar situations in the future.

Jamie Lin Commentary, Web Trends , , , , , ,

  • if you choose to share that $1,000 with the rest of us, then nobody will have an unfair advantage.
  • I think one thing we must discuss on this is the information he must publish.. Is it worth it to published it?? And also, How it will benefit the society??
  • FrankReed
    So Jamie - Using this logic if I am handed $1,000 that I know was obtained illegally by someone else then it's OK for me to use because possession is 9/10 of the law?
  • I think it's a bit different. What I'm saying is if you then hold on to the $1,000, then you're $1,000 richer and if you then use that money to improve your own competency, say getting a new iPhone 3GS, then you suddenly have an advantage over the rest of us. However, if you choose to share that $1,000 with the rest of us, then nobody will have an unfair advantage.

    But the analogy is not perfect since money can be returned but information, once disclosed, can't be undisclosed.
blog comments powered by Disqus