No, I'm not. I'm saying Techcrunch doesn't cover startups anymore.
>In light of this, my conclusion that YC and Arrington have some sort of friendly or financial relationship leading to a lowered-barrier-to-article for YC-funded startups is sound if not altogether true.
No, they don't. Techcrunch covers YC startups out of laziness and journalistic inadequacy. They want to give the appearance that they still cover early stage startups, but they don't. They only cover YC startups. YC offers an easy filter for TC to have some stories to give the outward appearance that their blog hasn't changed over time.
If you aren't saying what I've asserted you're saying, please explain the above. Also, did you edit your original comment? Perhaps I misread it.
In any event, it remains awfully convenient to chalk up the evident YC fetish at TechCrunch to mere editor laziness: I've seen plenty of seed-funded or non-funded startups in the past months-- heck, TC pays folks to sort through the mountains of press releases that arrive every day; I'm sure that there is no dearth of interesting, upstarting startups to profile.
I've always gotten the impression that TechCrunch serves up a fairly decent mixed bag-- except when they seem to exclusively cover YC-funded startups. Hence, my prior remarks.
For your statement to be true, it seems that either the advice dispensed by YC advisors is sufficient to transform a bad idea into a good idea or alternatively, that the YC selection committee only selects ideas destined for success. While these points do hold /some/ water (good advice never hurts, and pg et. al. clearly know a thing or two about entrepreneurship), it is still important to note that YC makes mistakes from time to time and that (participated in YC) -> (good startup) does not imply that (NOT participated in YC) -> (NOT good startup). Heck, even the first implication is a fallacy.
Regardless, at the end of the day, you're asking me to assume that founders who either don't make the cut for YC or whom didn't apply in the first place are either inferior entrepreneurs or are pushing a bad idea. This is simply not true.
Entrepreneurship has been around for a LONG time and plenty of people are working their butts off for a shot at launching a successful, growing startup. For some, YC provides the perfect opportunity to actually sit down and execute an idea; for most, YC is either not an option or is simply not necessary.
In the past couple of weeks, TechCrunch has reported on YC startups with surprising frequency. Given that it is fairly difficult to get TC to profile one's startup, it seems a little suspicious that whenever a YC app launches, it gets a (typically positive) write-up. In light of this, my conclusion that YC and Arrington have some sort of friendly or financial relationship leading to a lowered-barrier-to-article for YC-funded startups is sound if not altogether true.