Larry Kramer, the online journalism pioneer and persistent gadfly, finally took credit where credit is certainly due, in a story he tells of giving me my big break way back in the dark ages.

In a recent video interview with Beet.TV, below, Kramer claims I “scared” him into giving me a stringer job at the Washington Post in the early 1980s.

Apparently, I harangued Kramer, who was then the metro editor, over poor-quality coverage of Georgetown University–where I was an undergraduate–by the august newspaper.

I recall a simple phone request for, you know, accuracy and no misspelling from the Post. But it’s true, its stories were godawful, giving me my first stepping stone.

Thanks, Larry!

Here’s Kramer–who founded MarketWatch–telling his tale of woe:

Last week, BoomTown was in Washington, D.C., my old stomping grounds for 15 years, from attending Georgetown University as an undergraduate to covering the beginnings of the Internet at the Washington Post.

I miss a lot of things about living there, but most definitely not the poisonous political partisanship that you get sucked into from the minute you arrive.

Most recently, for example, it was ugly battles over financial reform, some tough remarks by President Barack Obama toward the GOP and–I swear–the “controversy” over some airbrushing of House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi on a magazine cover.

In other words, it does not take much for the denizens there to descend into the mud-slinging swamp the city was built on.

But it’s almost a relief to be in D.C. rather than in California, given how increasingly hostile the atmosphere is getting as a range of companies wrestle over a range of issues both key and trivial.

The hostilities especially center on the three main powers of Silicon Valley today: Google (GOOG), Apple (AAPL) and Facebook.

And, specifically, the conflicts include Apple versus Google and Adobe (ADBE) and HTC and the First Amendment; Google versus Apple and Facebook and Microsoft (MSFT) and the Federal Trade Commission and–oh, yes–China; and Facebook versus Google and Twitter and anyone who gets in the way of its Manifest Destiny of Like-buttoning the Web.

Even Yahoo (YHOO) is entering the fray, with CEO Carol Bartz taking please-don’t-forget-us shots at Google and Facebook recently.

The Apple shooting match with Adobe over its Flash video technology is perhaps the most riveting, especially because it is the computer giant’s CEO, Steve Jobs, personally and relentlessly conducting the assault.

Jobs called Adobe technology shoddy, Adobe execs called Jobs controlling, the blogosphere erupted.

While issues around the use of Flash are a lot more complex, of course, they illustrate just how much the digital sector is at a critical inflection point.

That’s especially true as the game moves from the laptop/desktop, Web-centric world to one more social, mobile and focused on innovative new devices, such as smartphones and tablets.

This means the potential for a shift in power, obviously–which, in turn, means more wrangling among and between the digital powers-that-be.

It’s the top of mind as the next D: All Things Digital conference approaches in less than a month. In our eighth foray out, there have never been more overt power struggles among the various players who will be onstage.

Last year, in our opening essay for D7, titled “Welcome to Web 3.0,” we made a prediction.

“So what’s the seminal development that’s ushering in the era of Web 3.0? It’s the real arrival, after years of false predictions, of the thin client, running clean, simple software, against cloud-based data and services,” we wrote, specifically referencing the growing popularity of Apple’s iPod and iPhone as the harbingers of this important trend.

We continued: “But this is not just about one company, one platform or even one form factor. No, this new phenomenon is about handheld computers from many companies, with software platforms and distribution mechanisms tightly tied to cloud-based services, whether they are multi-player games, e-commerce offerings or corporate databases.”

Looking back over the last year, we think we got it pretty right, as companies of all kinds and in all arenas raced to be part of the social, mobile, cloud-centered action.

This fusion and, really, collision of key trends will be at the heart of what we’ll be focusing on at D8 as the major companies in tech and media try to figure out how consumers want to conduct their digital lives going forward and with what devices.

And inevitably, that has begun to cause some major rifts among and between the powers that be throughout tech and media. It’s clear to us that a major realignment of consumer expectations and desires is taking place, along with a fundamental shift in how we all relate to computing.

Still, with all the changes, it’s important to keep a respectful tone, which seems to have gotten a bit lost of late, especially now when every tiny shift and disagreement enters the digital echo chamber and quickly moves from loud to strident.

Such noise inevitably makes the whole competitive necessity of Silicon Valley–which is one of its greatest assets, of course–seem tinny and small, much like what you hear out of Washington all the time.

One of the reasons I moved out West was that it always seemed that–whatever the rivalry or wrangling–Silicon Valley was much better than that.

So even though healthy and robust competition is what makes it all work in tech, as Sergeant Esterhaus of “Hill Street Blues” used to say in the trademark phrase, which you can see in this video, “Let’s be careful out there”:

[T-shirt photo courtesy of Zazzle]

Last week, BoomTown was in Washington, D.C., my old stomping grounds for 15 years, from attending Georgetown University as an undergraduate to covering the beginnings of the Internet at the Washington Post.

I miss a lot of things about living there, but most definitely not the poisonous political partisanship that you get sucked into from the minute you arrive.

Most recently, for example, it was ugly battles over financial reform, some tough remarks by President Barack Obama toward the GOP and–I swear–the “controversy” over some airbrushing of House Majority Leader Nancy Pelosi on a magazine cover.

In other words, it does not take much for the denizens there to descend into the mud-slinging swamp the city was built on.

But it’s almost a relief to be in D.C. rather than in California, given how increasingly hostile the atmosphere is getting as a range of companies wrestle over a range of issues both key and trivial.

The hostilities especially center on the three main powers of Silicon Valley today: Google (GOOG), Apple (AAPL) and Facebook.

And, specifically, the conflicts include Apple versus Google and Adobe (ADBE) and HTC and the First Amendment; Google versus Apple and Facebook and Microsoft (MSFT) and the Federal Trade Commission and–oh, yes–China; and Facebook versus Google and Twitter and anyone who gets in the way of its Manifest Destiny of Like-buttoning the Web.

Even Yahoo (YHOO) is entering the fray, with CEO Carol Bartz taking please-don’t-forget-us shots at Google and Facebook recently.

The Apple shooting match with Adobe over its Flash video technology is perhaps the most riveting, especially because it is the computer giant’s CEO, Steve Jobs, personally and relentlessly conducting the assault.

Jobs called Adobe technology shoddy, Adobe execs called Jobs controlling, the blogosphere erupted.

While issues around the use of Flash are a lot more complex, of course, they illustrate just how much the digital sector is at a critical inflection point.

That’s especially true as the game moves from the laptop/desktop, Web-centric world to one more social, mobile and focused on innovative new devices, such as smartphones and tablets.

This means the potential for a shift in power, obviously–which, in turn, means more wrangling among and between the digital powers-that-be.

It’s the top of mind as the next D: All Things Digital conference approaches in less than a month. In our eighth foray out, there have never been more overt power struggles among the various players who will be onstage.

Last year, in our opening essay for D7, titled “Welcome to Web 3.0,” we made a prediction.

“So what’s the seminal development that’s ushering in the era of Web 3.0? It’s the real arrival, after years of false predictions, of the thin client, running clean, simple software, against cloud-based data and services,” we wrote, specifically referencing the growing popularity of Apple’s iPod and iPhone as the harbingers of this important trend.

We continued: “But this is not just about one company, one platform or even one form factor. No, this new phenomenon is about handheld computers from many companies, with software platforms and distribution mechanisms tightly tied to cloud-based services, whether they are multi-player games, e-commerce offerings or corporate databases.”

Looking back over the last year, we think we got it pretty right, as companies of all kinds and in all arenas raced to be part of the social, mobile, cloud-centered action.

This fusion and, really, collision of key trends will be at the heart of what we’ll be focusing on at D8 as the major companies in tech and media try to figure out how consumers want to conduct their digital lives going forward and with what devices.

And inevitably, that has begun to cause some major rifts among and between the powers that be throughout tech and media. It’s clear to us that a major realignment of consumer expectations and desires is taking place, along with a fundamental shift in how we all relate to computing.

Still, with all the changes, it’s important to keep a respectful tone, which seems to have gotten a bit lost of late, especially now when every tiny shift and disagreement enters the digital echo chamber and quickly moves from loud to strident.

Such noise inevitably makes the whole competitive necessity of Silicon Valley–which is one of its greatest assets, of course–seem tinny and small, much like what you hear out of Washington all the time.

One of the reasons I moved out West was that it always seemed that–whatever the rivalry or wrangling–Silicon Valley was much better than that.

So even though healthy and robust competition is what makes it all work in tech, as Sergeant Esterhaus of “Hill Street Blues” used to say in the trademark phrase, which you can see in this video, “Let’s be careful out there”:

[T-shirt photo courtesy of Zazzle]

This weekend, BoomTown got hold of a new book by former AOL exec and longtime entrepreneur Ted Leonsis, which it set to be released on Feb. 8 by Regnery Publishing.

Titled “The Business of Happiness: 6 Secrets to Extraordinary Success in Life and Work,” Leonsis penned the book with former AOL PR head John Buckley.

And like the ebullient Leonsis, its entertaining fulcrum is a list he often talks about, one he made after a scary plane experience 25 years ago of the 101 things he wanted to achieve before he died.

“At the time, I thought that ticking items off my list would make me happy,” he writes in the book’s introduction.

It seems to have worked, he notes. “I’ve found that actively pursuing happiness seems to be a driver of success.”

In the second part of the book, Leonsis offers advice to others on how to get to happiness and success the Ted way.

But I especially enjoyed the first part, in which Leonsis tells his story–from humbling beginnings to college at Georgetown University to his start in the tech industry at Wang to his first successful forays into entrepreneurship.

Eventually, one of his start-ups–Redgate Communications–was bought by Steve Case of AOL.

Leonsis writes about this roller-coaster ride at AOL, which had as many downs as ups–with one of its down-est downs being its moment of glory: The merger with Time Warner (TWX).

“Let me state for the record: I was passionately opposed to the merger with Time Warner,” he writes. And he was.

For the most part in the book, Leonsis is probably kinder to the principals on all sides than is warranted.

But–for those who know him well–this is due more his glass-full nature than trying to be willfully opaque about what is now widely considered the worst U.S. business alliance in history.

And Leonsis does correctly point out one of the merger’s main screw-ups–the inability, due to internal politics, to sell AOL broadband over Time Warner’s powerful cable system.

It is also no surprise that Leonsis takes the AOL side, painting a picture of obstructive Time Warner execs more obsessed with Wall Street than creating great products.

Writes Leonsis:

“It was no longer, ‘What great product did we release this week?’ Everything–everything–was about whether we were going to send enough money to New York to help our new corporate parent meet its $11 billion EBITDA number and generate cash flow to pay off Time Warner’s debts. I remember coming out of meetings and saying to people, ‘We could be making nuclear power plants, for all you could tell from that meeting.’”

In the end, the Time Warner forces won out over those from AOL and Leonsis found that he was the last man standing, this time with new CEO Jon Miller.

With Miller, Leonsis slogged on at AOL, trying to move its prospects forward, but that also ended in tears.

Miller–who is now digital head at News Corp. (NWS)–got unfairly canned by Time Warner.

Unhappy with the new exec team–which was later tossed out too–Leonsis left in 2007.

AOL (AOL) has recently been spun out of Time Warner, with former Google (GOOG) exec Tim Armstrong at the helm.

And Leonsis has also moved on–becoming even more involved with his sports teams, forays into filmmaking and investing in new start-ups (sometimes with Case)–and carving out what seems to be a pretty happy life.

At the end of his book, Leonsis publishes his list and shows what he has checked off and what he has not.

He seems to have made a big dent in it, although he still needs to win a world championship and go into outer space. Also get a hole-in-one.

Not that I am keeping track, Ted, but you better get cracking.

And, to get a taste of Ted’s infectious style, here’s an interview with him I did in Silicon Valley in 2008, in which he mentions happiness a lot:

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20100119/a-sneak-peek-at-ted-leonsis-new-book-the-business-of-happiness/feed/ 5 http://allthingsd.com/20090827/aol-still-shaking-up-staff-hires-new-cfo-artie-minson/ http://allthingsd.com/20090827/aol-still-shaking-up-staff-hires-new-cfo-artie-minson/#comments Thu, 27 Aug 2009 12:47:38 +0000 Peter Kafka http://mediamemo.allthingsd.com/?p=10396 Newish AOL CEO Tim Armstrong hasn’t gone on a massive firing binge. But he’s still shaking up the ranks at the Time Warner (TWX) unit. Today, for instance, he is installing a new chief financial officer: Artie Minson, the deputy CFO at sister company Time Warner Cable (TWC). Minson replaces Nisha Kumar, who held the spot for two years.

Minson is actually rejoining AOL–he was previously an SVP in its finance department and left to join Time Warner Cable prior to its own spinoff from Time Warner.

It’s one of a series of top-level moves Armstrong has made since leaving Google (GOOG) to run the Internet pioneer, now set to be spun off by its parent company later this year (if it isn’t sold first). He brought in Jeff Levick, another Google vet, to replace Greg Coleman as sales boss. And he purchased Patch Media, the local media company he had invested in, installing its CEO as the head of a newly created AOL venture arm. Former Bebo boss Joanna Shields is also out the door.

Here’s the release:

AOL NAMES ARTHUR MINSON AS CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
Time Warner Cable Deputy CFO Rejoins AOL; Brings Critical Expertise from Time Warner Cable’s Successful Transition to Independent Public Company
New York, NY, August 27, 2009–AOL today named Arthur Minson as the company’s new Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. Minson joins AOL from Time Warner Cable (NYSE: TWC), where he has served as Executive Vice President and Deputy CFO and helped manage that company’s separation from Time Warner. Prior to his role at Time Warner Cable, Minson led AOL’s Corporate Finance and Development activities. ??”We’re delighted to have Artie back at AOL as we continue our transition to an independent public company,” said AOL CEO Tim Armstrong. “Artie’s strong financial acumen, operating experience, and deep understanding of our company and the Internet and content industries make him a perfect fit for AOL. He’s also a public company veteran who helped handle Time Warner Cable’s transition to a public company. Artie will hit the ground running and be a tremendous asset to AOL as we focus on driving growth, value and innovation.” ?”This is a wonderful opportunity to rejoin AOL at one of the most important and exciting times in this great company’s history,” said Minson. “AOL has an incredible collection of assets, and Tim has set the company on the right strategic course. I look forward to working with Tim and the entire AOL organization to help maximize the financial and operating performance of these assets and their value for investors.” ?In his new role, Minson will oversee the Company’s financial functions including accounting, financial planning and analysis, tax, treasury, human resources, mergers and acquisitions, and internal audit. Minson will be headquartered in New York City and will begin at AOL on September 8, 2009.? ?Minson previously served as Executive Vice President and Deputy Chief Financial Officer at Time Warner Cable, overseeing the company’s accounting, financial planning and analysis, operations finance, corporate services, and internal audit functions. He also worked closely with TWC’s treasury and IR departments, as well as senior management, to craft company strategy in those areas.
Minson joined Time Warner Cable in 2006 in connection with its planned IPO. Prior to that, Minson was Senior Vice President, Corporate Finance and Development at AOL, where he was responsible for financial planning and analysis, mergers and acquisitions and corporate financial administration. He’s also held senior finance positions at Rainbow Media Holdings, Inc. and Time Warner Inc. Minson, a CPA, began his career in the Audit Practice of Ernst and Young as one of Time Warner’s principal outside auditors. He holds a BSBA in Accounting from Georgetown University and an MBA with a concentration in Finance from Columbia Business School.? ?On May 28, 2009, Time Warner Inc. announced that its Board of Directors had authorized management to proceed with plans for the complete legal and structural separation of AOL from Time Warner. Following the proposed transaction, AOL would be an independent, publicly traded company. Time Warner has indicated that it aims to complete the proposed transaction around the end of this year. ??Minson is replacing Nisha Kumar, who left the company earlier this summer.

]]> http://allthingsd.com/20090827/aol-still-shaking-up-staff-hires-new-cfo-artie-minson/feed/ 0 http://allthingsd.com/20080514/memo-to-don-graham-thar-he-blows/ http://allthingsd.com/20080514/memo-to-don-graham-thar-he-blows/#comments Wed, 14 May 2008 15:56:32 +0000 Kara Swisher http://kara.allthingsd.com/20080514/memo-to-don-graham-thar-he-blows/

Another day, another tech blog eruption featuring Michael “The Volcano” Arrington of TechCrunch and, this time, Wired’s Betsy “Ain’t-Backing-Down” Schiffman.

When last we checked in with Arrington, he was elegantly telling Chris Shipley that her longstanding tech conference might want to take a dirt nap. Specifically: “Demo needs to die.”

But that’s not all!

Before that, Arrington was comparing tech blogs to gangs and contemplating bloody fights with some post-bashing tango. In it, he advised tech blogs not to raise money and talked of the importance of sector roll-ups without, oops, actually mentioning TechCrunch was both considering raising money and doing a roll-up of tech blogs.

Here’s one incredible quote from the piece: “Personally, I’ve found that if a fight is necessary, fight clean and fight hard. Make it as bloody as possible and end it fast, with no loose ends dangling about. Leave no lingering emotional stone unturned. When everyone gets up and dusts themselves off, the issue should have been resolved one way or the other, and both sides should be happy to shake hands and tango another day, even if the handshaking is done privately.”

In the latest kerfuffle, Schiffman wrote what was a minor criticism at the very end of a piece about a syndication deal that TechCrunch struck with the Washington Post (WPO).

She wrote: “We’ve got nothing against TechCrunch, but it seems crazy-crazy to us that the Washington Post, a paper known for the sort of reporting that can take down U.S. presidents, is publishing content written by a dude who invests in the companies he writes about. But what do we know.”

Snarky yes, but Arrington writes like this all the time (as does BoomTown).

More importantly, since Arrington does actually invest in several companies and says he also advises some covered by TechCrunch (see here in a very short disclosure, given he invested his own money), it is not an outrageous point to make related to a deal with a venerable media institution like the Post.

In any case, Arrington has got to have heard this one before and in much worse ways.

I know I have many times due to my relationship with Megan Smith, who is currently a vice president at Google (GOOG), as is disclosed here in detail, even though I do not own one single share in the company and–TMI–we split all costs exactly down to the penny (except for all those pricey over-and-above-birthdays-and-Christmas toys she likes to buy for our kids, which I sensibly refuse to pay for).

As I wrote in my disclosure: “I am well aware of the controversies surrounding ethics online now swirling about, some of which have resulted in giving readers some pause about the quality and honesty of some in the blogosphere. Such wariness is always a good thing for everyone and I encourage readers to ask tough questions and demand more of those providing them information of all kinds. I know that I am asking for a large measure of trust from readers of the site, and I pledge to do everything I can to be deserving of that trust.”

So I get maybe being irked, especially if you are trying to be as transparent as possible, and maybe writing Wired a stern note saying it was unfair.

But instead of that, he chose to respond by putting out another set of classy bons mots on Twitter: “Wow. F*** You too, Wired.”

In a post yesterday, peacefully titled “OK, Wired, Let’s Do This,” Arrington blamed this explosion on “a night of heavy drinking at the Time 100 party.”

OK, maybe he’s drunk and incredibly rash, but it was liquor imbibed at a very important soiree!

But post-drinking, I assume since it was posted in the afternoon, Arrington followed up with another winner on Twitter: “No one at Wired is responding to me today about their post yesterday. I’m organizing a Wired burning party (the mag, not their offices).”

Well, phew, just the magazines on fire! Ha, ha, ha!

Actually, not funny at all–I am just humorless about book-burning, so I will take any and all criticism on the subject for that stance, given the ugly history of the burning of media–but there you have it.

Except not at all.

Arrington wrote his own piece yesterday, which was meant to be reasonable, although it was seeping with indignation about small slights over when and how Wired responded to him (which appeared to have been done, but not to his liking, as Wired’s follow-up responding to Arrington’s antics recounted) and with too much of a gotcha focus on what is a dumb, name-calling tag word Wired used on the story.

But while he was right about the juvenile tag, Arrington then, like clockwork, in the very same piece called Schiffman a “troll.”

Well, at least he’s consistent.

But not at all like what I know the Washington Post expects from those it affiliates with, which is to say making the highest and most strenuous efforts to be civil, fair and temperate.

While it has not always succeeded at this–its Janet Cooke debacle in the early 1980s, for example, was a black eye–the Post has always tried to aim for the highest of standards.

How do I know this? Because I started delivering mail at the Post while I was in college at Georgetown University, was later an intern there and then a reporter for a decade more.

I could not be more proud of my time there or be more in admiration of the people who work there every day–even in these tough times for newspapers–who try very hard to act, when representing the Post, as professionals.

No one exemplifies that more than the Post’s owner and CEO Don Graham (pictured here), whom I admire profoundly. At once a gentle soul and also wise to the ways of the world, Graham is a true hero of mine.

While I love my various jobs at Dow Jones (NWS), I have missed being at the Post many times over the years, and Graham and I have always been in touch.

So I am very sorry to see the Post dragged into this temper tantrum by one of its new contributors, sullying its fine reputation.

And if it is just showboating, as some have suggested–a traffic-inducing faux wrestling match for the cheap seats in the back (and they are cheap)–than it is a lousy show.

In any case, Arrington will surely once again–as he has–claim that competitors like Wired and also this site should not comment on his behavior at TechCrunch (and, just to be clear, AllThingsD, wholly owned by Dow Jones, is not vying with TechCrunch to appear in the Washington Post either).

But standards and public online conduct are an increasingly important issue, if the blogosphere–as I believe Arrington must want also–is to have the kind of credibility it deserves.

And while Arrington and I obviously do not see eye-to-eye on a lot of stuff–I have criticized some of TechCrunch’s practices and Arrington’s own professional behavior directly to him via email and to others and I have even written about it several times (here, for example)–I do admire TechCrunch’s energy and relentless focus and the way it has forced others to compete more rigorously in covering the Web 2.0 sector.

And, lastly, whether Schiffman or I question such a syndication deal, it really does not matter, since it is solely up to the editors of the Post as to what they want to publish.

So, if they choose TechCrunch, that’s their decision.

But–and I can’t wait to see what delightful name Arrington slings at me for saying so–TechCrunch, in accepting what is a real honor and validation from one of this country’s great media organizations, should be ashamed of returning the favor by dragging the Post into a largely unprovoked and dirty gutter fight.

Please see this disclosure related to me and Google. ]]> http://allthingsd.com/20080514/memo-to-don-graham-thar-he-blows/feed/ 11