The World You Created
The main thing that’s been exciting Twitter/Blogland for the past 24 hours has been this whole SXSW Zuckerberg/Lacy thing and pretty much everyone except Jemima Kiss is tearing Sarah Lacy to shreds. Everyone’s been saying that she was ‘flirty’ and acted like a ‘bimbo’ and that she gave girls in tech a bad name.
I’ve only seen the cut down interview, so clearly missed the feeling in the room over the course of an hour, but I have to say that I didn’t find her particularly annoying at all. Sure, perhaps she misjudged what the audience wanted, but all I really saw was that she was trying to have a relaxed conversational interview with someone… and that someone was monosyllabic and uncharismatic. The one thing I’ve realised over the years is that, when it comes to interviewing, it takes two to tango. When an interview goes badly, the interviewee is as much at fault as the interviewer (anyone remember Christopher Lloyd and Anne Bancroft on Wogan?).
So why go after Sarah Lacy?
Well, I wonder if it has to do with her gender? When you Google Sarah Lacy, the second result is a Valley Wag piece on her entitled “Smoking Sarah Lacy”: “… there’s one salient fact about Sarah Lacy that most commentators are way too politically correct to mention: she is the hottest reporter in the Valley. No, make that the hottest reporter in the tech world – ever.” The hottest reporter in the tech world. Hmmmm. Not the smartest? The best writer? So, her value is in her ‘cuteness’? Am I getting that right?
Have a look at the results for Mark Zuckerberg - do you notice how there’s nothing about his gender nor his sexual attractiveness (or lack thereof) nor is there a photo of him sticking out any of his ’sexually alluring’ body parts? Interesting that. Well, it isn’t really interesting. That’s just how things are.
Now, as any titted geek knows, gender is still a big deal, even in this world without bodies. If it had been a man interviewing Zuckerberg, I’m 100% positive we wouldn’t have heard a thing about it other than, perhaps, ‘Zuckerberg’s a bit boring, isn’t he?’ As it is, I think Sarah has been criticised for being, well, female.
Jeff Jarvis has a good, non-sexist take on it:”At the end of it all, I have no doubt that Lacy is an experienced and talented journalist, that she respects Zuckerberg, that she was trying to put him at ease, and that she was going after the stories she found interesting. But that’s the essence of her problem: She didn’t stand back and remind herself that her job was to enable a conversation not with her but with the crowd about what they found interesting.”
This is more like it, someone who understands what they are talking about who can think clearly without resorting to lowest common denominator thinking. I find it interesting that he and Jemima are both professional journalists and are the only ones who have an informed and level-headed take on it. In the end, it just seems like Sarah Lacy’s interviewing technique, which may work very well in an extended interview for a magazine, just wasn’t the right thing to do on the day for that Facebook fanboy audience. Not the end of the world.
Far, far too many bloggers- male and female, A-list and down- have no freakin’ idea what ‘journalism’ actually means (I promise I won’t go off on one now about the supposedly important podcaster who told me that he doesn’t care about facts or fact checking). Nor do they seem to understand that just because someone can write in a newspaper, magazine or blog it doesn’t mean that they will automatically be a good interviewer in front of an audience, camera or mobile phone (resisting the urge to clear my throat knowingly). Citizen journalism has gone from being the Great New Media Hope to being a bunch of dumb loudmouths yapping and waving their cocks around (yes, boys, I mean you). When the mob rules, this is what you get: unfocused, ill-informed, biased sniping by huge numbers of people who actually think their opinion should mean something more than anyone else’s.
Is this the brave new world we’ve created?
production 
QR Code DVD 
34 Comments, Comment or Ping
Adam Bowie
It was interesting listening to the latest This Week in Tech this morning which talks a bit about this session. Robert Scoble was on for a while, and although it wasn’t developed, he pointed out that it was easy to become part of a “Twitter mob” - however much he may or may not have wanted to.
Without knowing more about the actual atmosphere in the room - and to be honest I got bored after reading a couple of blog entries on the subject - I do think that the pinging of Twitter on Blackberrys and laptops can easily turn an audience into a vengeful beast quite quickly. That’s especially true if you haven’t quite got the measure of them.
I do sometimes wonder about the whole backchannel thing - are you genuinely commenting on what you are seeing, or are you getting sidetracked and just trying to be witty and clever in front of your peers? Is it not a little analagous to the kids who used to muck around in class making snide comments to those nearby at the expense of the teacher? Should we be encouraging this? Is it not actually a little discourteous to the speaker that you’re on your mobile device while they’re talking anyway (unless you’re note taking)? It annoys the hell out of me when somebody starts checking their email in a meeting; you might just as well get on the phone to someone.
Anyway, I’ve drifted off topic.
Mar 10th, 2008
giagia
One day I might tell you about a backchannel discussion during a Scoble seesion at LIFT where someone said, ‘Let’s all cough every time Scoble says, ‘A-lister’.’ A few minutes later it sounded like a quarter of the audience had suddenly come down with a cold.
Mar 10th, 2008
Annie Mole
But hasn’t this happened each year with Twitter?
Even pre Twitter, remember Mena Trott from Six Apart getting heckled through IRC at Les Blogs. When Zuckerberg was interviewed by a female reporter, Lesley Stahl on 60 minutes there were similar comments about her giving him an easy time. And interviewing him like a grandmother would interview a grandchild.
Twitter & IRC and the like can be extremely playground and excluding without there being a “speaker” or “presenter” (male or female) involved. I’ve done it myself and now *try* to make an effort to do much fewer @XXXXX tweets. But it’s very hard to do this when you get caught up with others around you doing the same thing. Twitter can be addictive and it’s creating a pattern for *bad* & *rude* learned behaviour.
@XXXXX tweets are all very well if you know who the @XXXXX is - but otherwise you can feel like you’re listening to a one sided phone conversation (or someone speaking a secret language) if the majority of tweets you read are from people doing this. That’s true whether they are male or female.
Perhaps we should all try to resolve to do fewer @XXXX tweets and have awareness of the whole audience.
Now I’ve gone off topic to your off topic point ;-)
Mar 10th, 2008
Alex
“When the mob rules, this is what you get: unfocused, ill-informed, biased sniping by huge numbers of people who actually think their opinion should mean something more than anyone else’s.”
Welcome to democracy.
From a different vantage point…do you think Lacy would have even been offered the job to interview Zuckerberg if she were not “hawt?”
Is it possible that Lacy is where she is part by her “talent” but also because of her “hawtness?”
Sure in a prefect world we are judged only by our skills and abilities…but in the real world our looks do matter.
I think I will file this one under, “hawt chick who rose to fame using her looks suddenly found herself under-qualified” - and audience took note.
Mar 10th, 2008
giagia
Alex, unfortunately, I think you’re right. She’s pretty and so she’s become more well known than other (perhaps better) business journalists. But… this is the world we’ve created. But if you were being given promotions and book deals you’d take every chance you could as well. It’s not really her fault (well, maybe it *is* her fault if she made the mistake of believing her own press - kiss of death that), but she’s clearly not a complete idiot.
Zuck, however, is, indeed, dull. ;)
This whole post came from a Tweet I made earlier today
Mar 10th, 2008
James
*I’m confused* Is it no longer ok for me to say Gia looks devastatingly attractive in the ‘titted geek’ video. :-s ????
To be honest, as primitive as it may be, men simply find it impossible to not notice an attractive woman.
Mar 10th, 2008
giagia
Annie- Note all of the people who spoke about getting stick from geeks were women. :-/
Sure, I remember going at CyberSalon in 2000 or 2001 when they were accepting SMS messages, which would then be typed up and projected onto a screen behind the speakers, when an audience member questioned the decision of one of the (male) speakers to wear the shoes he did… And, of course, the Scoble thing I mentioned above… so it’s not just women that are targeted.
But with men there doesn’t seem to be the heavy, negative, nasty pack mentality that there is against women. Would the Mean Kids have been as nasty to a man as they were to Kathy Sierra and Maryam Scoble (I know they were shitty to Robert Scoble and Hugh Macleod, too, but it wasn’t quite as nasty as death threats, racism and mocking Maryam’s pregnancy and unborn child…)…
It’s more than just ‘a bunch of kids messing around in the back of the class’. It’s ganging up on women and then saying ‘Well, this is what it’s like, girly, if you don’t like it, leave it to us men.’
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
James, finding people attractive is perfectly acceptable. Encouraged even. But one shouldn’t value someone entirely because they are attractive, put them on a pedestal, give them promotions, give them everything they want… and then lambaste them for being mainly just attractive.
Mar 11th, 2008
Annie Mole
Yeah - getting back to your topic, I’m totally with you. I was speaking on a panel on BlogHer a couple of years ago and Maryam Scoble was on it about what it was like to blog as Robert’s wife. (Incidentally she is an absolutely lovely person and was really humble and surprised to be invited). She got a lot of stick even before she was pregnant.
I think the Kathy Sierra incident was unbelievable and I wonder what drives people to be so malicious.
I was speaking to another blogger the other day (who shall remain nameless but is also a woman) who was hassled so much through her blog, she had to move home.
So far I’ve been relatively lucky. I have been called a “bitch” & “neurotic” by graffiti artists who found comments on my blog from people saying they thought that graffiti artists who were hit by a train & killed, deserved to die. I spent hours deleting 100’s of comments as as result that were threatening to both me and my commentators.
I’ve had my blog spoofed by someone who I hear about in glowing terms all the time and naturally I find that quite difficult (I happen to not think that imitation is a form of flattery - particularly when the spoof must have taken that person several hours). I’m sure this had nothing to do with my sex but that I’d made a couple of comments about making money out of blogging and he obviously thinks I big myself up on my blog too much. Why that deserved a vicious spoof, I have no idea?
So yeah generally I’m in agreement with you and think on the whole women get a worse time than men.
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
I think what irks me most about it is the original reason I got so into the ‘net was that it *was* a ‘CyberUtopia’ where your gender or race weren’t important- it was all about what was going on in your mind.
To make it about what equipment someone has between their legs is so freakin’ backwards it’s unreal…
… but then I come from a long line of intelligent, independent, educated women. I’ve grown up knowing that I am a person who is capable of doing whatever I want. The reality is, however, that there isn’t a single man I know who has ever spent time marching on the streets to demand the right to stay at home more and do more of the cleaning, washing and cooking!
Even the least sexist men I know (my husband, for example) find their natural resting state to be ‘woman is my servant. she does what I want her to.’. It takes hard, hard work to break out of that mentality.
And I’m not convinced there are enough men online who have the brain-power to do that. (there’s a challenge for you, guys)
Mar 11th, 2008
Suw
I think we need to split the tech from the behaviour. Tech - like Twitter or IRC or other backchannels - are neutral, they can be good or bad but they are neither inherently one nor the other. I’ve been in some brilliant backchannels that have been both fun and constructive (gathering additional links on the subject being spoken about, for example). I’ve also been in ones that have turned into a bitchfest which, whilst amusing at times, can also get nasty.
The problem isn’t the backchannel, or the tech, but the people. Whilst Valleywag’s type of nasty gossip is seen as acceptable, we’re going to have a problem. Whilst we have an industry with more than it’s fair share of insecure males who find it easier to be aggressive than to be nice, because they think that that somehow protects them, we’re going to have a problem. And whilst we have under-talented hawt chix who ride on their looks to gain status even though they have all the tech savvy of a pea, we’ll have a problem.
(And yes, let’s not fool ourselves - a very small percentage of the women in tech are in tech not because they are techy but because merely being a good looking woman in a male-dominated arena gets them lots and lots of attention. Don’t make me name names.)
I don’t know one even begins to combat these things, because they are fundamental social problems with no easy solution. But we can start, as Gia has, with pointing out bad behaviour such as gender-based pile-ons, and we can stand up for our fellow women, take to task misbehaving men, but we must not get defensive or create a female ghetto (which I fear BlogHer tends towards being), else we will just be making things worse.
I feel lucky I’ve never really suffered from the problems other women have, and I also think it’s sad that I seem to be in a minority. :(
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
You may remember that I caused a bit of a stir when I got angry at Anina after she took part in a ‘Women in Technology’ panel at LIFT06 and spent the whole time talking about her clothes. I was also angry at LIFT for organising such a condescending session (why in the 21st Century do women need their own panel, why can’t they just naturally be a part of the whole conference?), but was most disappointed by Anina being an idiot. During the panel, Euan leaned over to me and joked, ‘She’s representing you.’ just as Anina started talking about how she needs to have a stylist when she attends conferences so her clothes match the room. And how models are using mobile phones to talk to each other. It was one of the most frustrating hours of my life.
I was criticised for going after Anina instead of the LIFT organisers (Oh, I did that, too, I can tell you) and was misunderstood by people thinking I was going after her cos she was in fashion. I was angry cos she let ‘women in technology’ down so god damned much, it had nothing to do with her looks or her job (I’d LOVE it if she had been a genuinely intelligent model who ran rings around others with her tech knowledge). I said at the time that I wanted people like Suw or Jane McGonigal or even my friend Jasmine Strong who is a freakin’ super-computer builder at Google to be up on that stage… not some dimwit who talks about her fucking clothes!
*and breathe*
Of course, the problem was initially caused by LIFT inviting her to take part in the discussion… but ultimately it came down to her being completely incapable of representing the brilliant and amazing work so many women are doing. ‘Yea, and like, I use a mobile to talk to other models! It’s *great*!’
What was interesting about that whole thing was that all of the women who agreed with me did so publicly… and all the men filled my email inbox with support.:-/
I’m all for supporting the sisterhood, but not blindly.
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
Can I just say that I *hate* having this conversation. When can we stop having to talk about gender and talk about ideas instead?
Mar 11th, 2008
James
The same day people stop referring to race perhaps?
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
I’d invite everyone regardless of race or gender to take the ‘race’ and ‘gender’ IAT’s here. No matter what race or gender you are, the results might surprise you.
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
I did the ‘Asian’ IAT and it said that I moderately prefer Asians as Americans and White Europeans as Foreigners. :)
Mar 11th, 2008
James
Darn, the IAT thing is aimed at Americans. I think I’m just neutral to all Americans, what does that make me?
Mar 11th, 2008
Steve
“Even the least sexist men I know (my husband, for example) find their natural resting state to be ‘woman is my servant. she does what I want her to.’. It takes hard, hard work to break out of that mentality.”
It takes work or enlightenment to break out of any mentality that you’ve learned during your youth. I know many men and women who would strongly disagree with a ‘least sexist men’ standard being set at ‘woman is my servant’, for instance… ;-)
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
Yea, Steve, but you are *mainly* girl. Take the gender test and tell me your result. I’m interested.
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
James, I only linked to the American one cos there are more options than the British one.
Mar 11th, 2008
Steve
Your data suggest a moderate association of Male with Science and Female with Liberal Arts compared to Female with Science and Male with Liberal Arts.
The data may suggest this (I don’t think so, as I know just as many female science/math types as male and more male creative/arts types than female) but I think the test is flawed. The categories could be anything and mistakes would still be made later in the test as you swap them around.
I’m not mainly girl, I’m *all* man- ask around*. I’m also not the only straight male I know who is secure enough to resist their experience of themselves and the world around them being reduced by limiting paradigms. I’m interested in different perspectives and the ‘geezer’ mindset bores me to tears. Equally, I couldn’t have any kind of serious relationship with a woman who didn’t consider herself a complete equal. Unless, of course, she had really nice tits.
*OK, if you ask Winnan, maybe 20%. But I was drunk and he’s got such big, strong arms…
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
Nope, the test isn’t flawed, Steve, your unconscious can work differently to what you *want* to think like. I got the same result on the Gender-Career test, moderately preferred White Europeans to Afro-Caribbeans and moderately preferred Asians to Whites.
I’ve been reading all about our subconscious cultural biases and have found that even Afro-Caribbeans will show a preference for Whites to Blacks… I would, however, be interested in seeing what the result of the ‘Asian Test’ would be with Vietnam vets or people who fought Japan in WWII… :-/
Now, answer me this: A man and his son are driving down the road one night when a car crashes into them out of nowhere. The car that hits them slams directly into the drivers side door killing the man on impact. The son is hurt badly, but still alive. The ambulance finally comes and they rush him to the hospital. As they burst through the emergency room doors the head doctor comes running out, looks at the young boy and freezes. The doctor looks up with a pale face and says “I can’t operate on this boy! This boy is my son!” How is this possible?
Mar 11th, 2008
James
Errrr the son’s mum is a doctor, surely???
Mar 11th, 2008
Steve
Obviously she’s female, as are 4 of the 6 doctors I know.
You’re right that under pressure I probably do make a masculine-gendered connection with some words relating to science and maths: I suppose that’s how ‘the world’ was when I learned them. It makes a very valid point on the power of subtext in language but that’s still very different from believing that women are servants. Despite growing up in a tough school and a house where my single-parent mother slaved away for 3 psychotic sons I have absolutely no confusion in that area at all.
It’s interesting. An inability to question learned gender roles is possibly the single biggest cause of unhappiness in the lives of most of the men I know, both in themselves and their relationships. Because, physically and mentally, I can play the alpha-male game as well as anyone, a lot of ‘geezers’ open up and talk to me about this stuff. Women aren’t the only ones who would benefit from a radical cultural adjustment.
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
Again, I’ve never seen a single man marching on the streets for the right to stay home to do the cleaning, the washing, the shopping, the cooking… If they want to do it, they can do it. I don’t think there’s a woman in the world who would do anything to stop them. :)
Mar 11th, 2008
Alex
Interesting that you “moderately preferred Asians to Whites.”
Reminds me of the time that Moki thought he was part Korean because Silver was.
Sorry…it’s my influence on the poor lad. ;-)
Do you think Sari would get the same result?
…
On a different note…it’s common to group all of us Asians together in one group, but it is common (or uncommon) knowledge that we don’t always get along.
Until recently, (e.g. my dad’s generation), this is how things were like…
China vs Japan = Jews vs Nazi Germany
Korea vs Japan = Lebanon vs Israel
Hmong, Vietnamese, Laotian, Cambodian…yeah we all have issues.
But in American, we are all grouped into a lump sum. I blame the lack of education over here.
Mar 11th, 2008
James
The same ignorant grouping in seen over here in Britain too; Hindus/Muslims, West Africans/West Indians and even Bosnians and Serbs have been thrown together (including living just streets apart from each other).
But I don’t believe people think, ‘they’re all Asian, black etc.’. I think the attitude is more that integration between these groups should be no different to integration with the indigenous population. They are all essentially becoming British after all, plus migrant groups tend to share common problems. Although equally, you have to respect (and expect) some cultural and historical differences and difficulties. Not too sure on this one.
Mar 11th, 2008
giagia
Alex, I’d be interested to see both yours and Sari’s results! They test is with crudely drawn Asian (or as we’d say in the UK Oriental) and White faces. It’s just the eyes - and perhaps the hair colour- that tells them apart.
To be honest, I wasn’t surprised at my result. I’ve always noticed I have a preference for Asian (again, Oriental) faces for some reason. Yes, even before my beautiful niece came into the world! Why that might be though, I don’t know.
Mar 12th, 2008
Katie Lee
What amazes me most about all this is that Lacy was exactly the same in her Kevin Rose interview at LeWeb3. It’s not exactly new or surprising that she opts for girly flirtation when interviewing. But neither is it unusual for any interviewer to adopt that style - just look at Wogan and Jonathan Ross for starters!
Regardless of whether she was any good or not, it’s fairly obvious to me that if she’d been a suited male business journo, the audience would have been contended just to grumble under their breaths (and on Twitter, of course).
Mar 12th, 2008
giagia
Katie, yep. No one can tell me that in all of the male-helmed interviews, panels, chats and talks at the multitude of geek events around the globe that there has *never* been another boring, misjudged or bad one? Please. We’ve just not heard about it…
Yes, there’s obviously misogyny involved… too bad most male geeks can’t accept that. Though that’s telling in itself.
Mar 12th, 2008
Alex
G~
I took the test and have discovered that Asians moderately preferred Gia to other white girls.
u r 1337 h4xor und pwns 411 07h3r5
Mar 12th, 2008
Emilie
“and that she gave girls in tech a bad name”
I think this sentence is sexist.
So, if this woman makes a bad interview, or whatever, she gives girls in tech a bad name.
But if she would have been a man, would “he” have given men in tech a bad name?
No. So stop this nonsense.
She doesn’t speaks for me, nor for anyone else but for her.
Stop saying that the actitude of one (1!!!) woman says something about the rest of the women.
Stop being sexist.
Mar 13th, 2008
giagia
Emilie, why not tell the person who wrote it instead. :)
Mar 13th, 2008
Sarah
Hi Gia,
Looking over both your post and the comments people seem to have missed some of the key things. Sarah is a journalist not a techie or even a geek as such. Yes she has a knowledge of the tech industry but she doesn’t necessarily have the skills of an interviewer on a stage. That is a VERY hard thing to do with little experience. It’s a shame that they didn’t request people to send in questions prior to the event.
In some ways this situation could be said to be a mis management of the conference session rather than an error on Sarah’s part… The questions were indeed predictable and some what dull. The other question is how much of the proposed questions were veto’d by the interviewee! That does happen.
On the women tech thing… I think the comments in your post say a lot. Yes women in tech are still treated differently and yes it’s down to social upbringing and stereotypes. So lets try changing that… break down stereotypes and call people on making assumptions about people based on looks, gender, race etc. It’s old and it’s not clever.
I’ve been at a technical conference all week this week and yes once again I still get asked why I am there, how am I techncial and so on. The best thing about it other than the great material is that there are no queues in the bathrooms. Just a shame about attitudes of those who are used to be in an all or majority male environment.
Girly Girls get looked at differently in tech, assumptions are made and geez does it get frustrating. ;) But better than that you can still surprise and shock people. I actually enjoy playing with the guys at these conferences. Let them dig themselves in holes and then surprise them with tech knowledge and a strong technical skills set! Eventually if all women did that in the industry they would learn not to make assumption ;)
Mar 13th, 2008
Reply to “The World You Created”