drama20

That's not what I wrote nor is it what I suggested. As I made clear, in his attacks on DEMO, Michael Arrington claimed that the fees DEMO charges presenters are tantamount to "payola." One of his blatant insinuations was that startups shouldn't be forced to pay to present because doing so is exploitative and drains them of capital that could be put to better use elsewhere.

He argued that TechCrunch50 selections were completely merit-based and that he is now providing the only major launch venue that's financially viable for young startups that don't have a spare $18,500.

Frankly, I think if you look at the startups that were selected and who is behind them, you can only come to two possible conclusions:

1. Silicon Valley's consumer internet scene is seriously f*cked. 2. Startups founded by (or associated with) people Arrington knows or is connected to in some way were favored.

I could honestly care less about the selections but calling Arrington's disingenuous arguments about TechCrunch50 disingenuous (which was the point of my post) is well-deserved in this case, especially after Valleywag pointed out that a startup involved with Michael Arrington's associate, friend and Edgeio co-founder Keith Teare was included. Apparently Teare is a TechCrunch shareholder as well if that's not enough conflict for you.