TWIT defines the news

It's official...

This Blog is NOT, I repeat, NOT a news site.

Not that I ever said it was but I digress..

I was informed of this fact by a "helpful" TWIT chatroom moderator who goes by the mysterious moniker of "Dan" during the Sunday October 5th edition of This Week in Tech (TWIT).

The whole exchange came about whilst happily participating in the "G-rated" revelry that is the TWIT IRC chatroom.  As the messages flew by, I noticed somebody asking if a popular TWIT show called, "The Social Hour" was still on.

Realizing that I had recently written an article on the topic I responded to the inquiry with a link and moved on.

Apparently, that was a mistake.

After a few more exchanges on unrelated topics covered in Sunday's show I noticed that TWIT Chat Moderator "Dan" was requesting that I check my "PM's"

So I complied and upon entering Dan's private little IRC channel he informed me that, " Only links from a news site were acceptable in the IRC channel." and " that your blog was not a legitimate news source."  Considering I'd seen this rule violated on more than one occasion by others including show producers, hosts and even moderators I knew I was again running headlong into the TWIT delusion. 

But I let it pass as I knew it was just the grumblings of yet another TWIT chat moderator with an inflated ego.

He went on to inform me that this was my only "Warning."

A little stunned but not really surprised given my checkered past with TWIT chatroom moderators I replied, " I'll keep your warning in mind" 

That wasn't enough for good ol' Dan, however, and he proceeded to go into half a paragraph of how he set the rules for the TWIT chatroom and was the final say in all things TWIT IRC, and he alone set the tone etc, etc...

Which after a brief pause brought out my inner 12 year old resulting in a response of...

"You really enjoy your little power trip don't you?  You know what Dan, Fuck Off...bye"

Being a mature male I probably could have handled that exchange better but I tend to respond as a child when treated like one.  Especially when it's undeserved....

To hell with turning the other cheek...

I'll be damned if I'll let some IRC moderator with a Napoleon complex get the better of me.  Besides, it's the first opportunity I've had to blindside the SOB the same way he blindsided me the last time I got kicked for some unknown, ambiguous sin.

I'm probably banned for life from TWIT chatrooms now but to be honest, the quality of TWIT programming has me finding less and less need of the convenience.  What it does bring to mind, however, is just what the definition of news is.

Dan's little admonition to me reeks of hypocrisy.  A close look at TWIT's "news" coverage finds it  largely comprised of rehashed content from other so-called "legitimate" news sources like TechCrunch, Engadget, Reddit and the occasional tweet.  TWIT's "news" programming is best described as a collection of editorial magazines aggregating someone else's content.  Which may have triggered my response. 

The articles in this blog that have been written about TWIT are no less valid if TWIT's "news" coverage is held up as the standard.  While they may be more editorial in nature they're always researched, sourced and unlike much of TWIT's news content, original reporting.  The difference is, the subject is TWIT which is likely what got dear old Dan's feathers ruffled.    

Dan can do whatever he wants with his chatrooms but his motives appear less about upholding journalistic integrity than censorship of anything that denies the delusion that currently pervades TWIT. 

The definition of "news" no longer meets the definition that "Dan" subscribes to.  How a "progressive" medium like TWIT fails to realize that is hypocritical bordering on the ridiculous.  Hey guys, we're not limited to 3 TV networks and some disembodied voice on the radio to tell us what's going on anymore.   

As far as TWIT goes, I've yet to see anything original come from them that had a Reuters or Associated Press tag attached to a story.  Meaning if we accept TWIT's definition of "news" coverage then what they provide is little more than editorials aggregated from so-called "real" sources.

Leading to the conclusion that they have no more value than what you'll find here...

The Emperor has no clothes

It drives me nuts...

Even though I know it shouldn't...

I mean, really now, who cares about one little podcasting network anyway?  In the grand scheme of things such concerns are less than trivial if not inconsequential.  If a beloved icon of tech journalism like Leo Laporte chooses to delude himself while his Rome is burning what business is it of ours if he chooses to believe otherwise?

If TWIT vanished from the landscape of Internet content the number of people who actually cared would be lower than the percentage of LGBT's in the Tea Party.

...and the king of Tech punditry would do just fine thank you...

Still...

Over the past few months I've continued to witness a sea change at TWIT with the most obvious symptom an exodus of popular hosts and programming.  In their place bizarre additions like Marketing Mavericks, a show based on sucking up to the kind of people who dreamed up click-through ads and stadiums named after cell-phone companies.

And then there's the ads!  Oh those god awful ads!  Where do they find these products??

Of course, not everybody agrees with me...

"I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it people like me!" Stuart Smiley

If you can sift through the barrage of delusional self-affirmation and staunch denial of anything contrarian that pervades today's TWIT, there are still gems to be found on the network. 

Shows like This Week in Law, This week in Enterprise Tech, Windows Weekly and the grand old man of the group This Week In Tech still shine.  Unfortunately, to find them you'll have to ignore the cognitive dissonance that promotes Tech News Today (TNT) as still being relevant or Floss Weekly and Ham Nation as being interesting.  Incidentally, after almost 6 months, TNT still consistently ranks far behind Tom Merritt's Daily Tech News show and has yet to break into the top 10 on most ranking authorities. 

With the often abrupt departures of popular talent like Tom Merritt, Brian Brushwood and even Iyaz Akhtar, the void that remains has been filled (with varying degrees of success) by hosts like:

Father Robert Ballecer,  the affable and upbeat "digital Jesuit" who is increasingly ever present and likely  heir to TWIT if not for his "other" job.  

Chad Johnson, OMGCHAD and newest Laporte protege' who is often called upon to beta test new programming like the short-lived This Week in YouTube and RedditUP (currently in beta.)

Sara Lane, a stalwart TWIT personality and second only to Laporte in the sheer volume of shows she hosts.  As one of the few remaining alumni from Laporte's TechTV days, Lane appears loyal to Laporte but one has to wonder if those convictions have been tested since the surprise departure of so many TWIT colleagues from the network.

And of course, Laporte himself who recently took back hosting duties of TWIT's tech review show Before You Buy after former host and producer Shannon Morse left TWIT's full time employ. 

Shannon Morse, the contractor, now only appears once a week on TWIT as co-host of Coding 101 with Fr. Robert Ballecer.

Morse, known most prominently from Darren Kitchen's Hak 5 was a recent addition to the network in the past year.  Her decision to trade a full time gig at TWIT to be a contract host for one show (while doing at least 2 others for Revision 3) can only be viewed as a foot out the door.

The only time a full time employee converts to a contractor these days is when somebody is on their way out and Laporte taking back hosting duties of Before You Buy underscores just how "out" Morse really is.

But let's be fair here.  While TWIT's apparent missteps are beginning to border on habitual, it's not entirely their fault.  Take a look at those same podcast rankings that are so damning to TNT and you'll find a saturated landscape.  Everybody and their brother seems to have a tech podcast.  Couple that with the fact that the novelty has worn off.  There's very little new information out there and "revolutionary" is just a marketing buzzword.  Technology isn't "magical" anymore and even your grandmother can use an IPad.   

Go ahead, check The Verge, TechCrunch or even TNT (if you can stay awake) and the content is without fail a daily march of ad nauseam reviews of yet another "revolutionary" smart device.  Lest we forget the constant security breaches of well known web properties and tech pundits desperately  inflating their copy by reviving long dead adjectives like, "plaudits."

Not very exciting...

Short term gain leading to long term consequences.

That TWIT advertising has increasingly strayed from a tech focus to products like razors, jewelry and snacks may be an indication that tech just isn't that sexy anymore.  Unfortunately, it also frequently results in content straying from technology to heated debates over single versus multi-blade razors.

Viewer's of TWIT could likely care less about razors, underwear and harvest rice sticks when they're watching Security Now or Windows Weekly.    At times even the hosts seem annoyed as they hawk often ridiculous and contextually irrelevant wares.  With an average of 2 to 4 live ad reads per TWIT show, anything that strays from the content runs the risk of losing an easily fickle audience.

Where TWIT may once have been a destination rivaling its progenitor, TechTV, in the past year it's become more akin to G4.  In case you don't get the analogy, G4 began as a cable channel focused on video games and gaming culture and ended with a schedule largely consisting of Cops reruns and infomercials.

TWIT's bizarre programming changes, a trend of topically irrelevant advertising and exodus of talent paint a dark picture of the network's future. 

It's high time ego and hubris take a back seat. 

Rome is burning and the Emperor has no clothes...