Obviously, DeFrank's trade for these many years has a higher set of stakes than most for a larger group of people. He is old school and has been in the business longer than (pick your cliche) most that report today online. Yet, I find myself coming back to question if a TechCrunch or anyone hired into a primarily web medium has any obligation to be vetted. Or, if like anything on the Interweb: Trust but verify as one of his favorite POTUS would say.

TechCrunch isn't a trusted news source for me and others I am sure. I enjoy reading TechCrunch from time to time and leaving comments but it isn't the same thing as the hope or expectation of a journalism schooled, ethically disclosed, and all around scoop hungry stable of crack reporters. See also: Stephen Glass for obvious caveats to even those hopes and expectations.

One thing that made me think a bit more and reflect was that Mike Arrington is out of town right? I think and Sarah Lacy is filling in — but I don't know if that extends to any co-editorial controls that might have otherwise been in place had Mike Arrington walked on the shop floor when all this went down at TechCrunch. This must be what it is like living in interesting times.

There are co-editors according to the TechCrunch about page (who knows?) which always made me wonder if it took a quorum to hit the publish button. I'm just a firm believer that when you are running a skeleton crew it is much easier for things to get sloppy, deviate from path, or experience variation from the normal quality of output.

Curious sidenote, I think this is the first link I've clicked through from you that _wasn't_ on VB. Sensitive subject?