Who should you trust?

Following up on “Guys, MG Siegler’s getting cranky about all these Path posts.”

They like attention and thus can’t stop: Michael Arrington and MG Siegler are basically telling the old-world media to suck it. 

And the press continues to press the case. Click that link, it’s a good rundown of the story, even though it’s tilted against the Dubious Duo of Silicon Valley Bloggers Who Invest in Companies.

The slap fight continues. It’s friggin’ awesome.

It’s also good for us. I want all y’all to criticize the shit out of each other. I want M&MG to have free rein and to run roughshod, even as they protect their interests and investments. And I want a greater awareness that this is what M&MG are doing.

But something bothers me. This line from the Michael Hiltzik’s LA Times article:

“The basic question is: Should you trust what you read in some of these blogs? In many respects, the answer is no.”

Actually, in many respects, the answer is DURRR. Should you trust what you read in some of anything, much less “these blogs”?

Should I trust Michael Hiltzik? Apparently, I am supposed to because he’s published in something bigger than “some of these blogs,” I guess. But he’s severely misinformed about — or worse, ignoring for the sake of a story — M&MG’s stances on objectivity.

Should I trust him? 

Arrington and Siegler are media mongers with major play and pull with important tech news sites such as Techmeme. But they aren’t the press. They don’t pretend to be. 

By the way, it’s not the “Path Affair,” Michael Hiltzik. It’s the “Path problem.” Or “Path Problem.” Yeah, let’s call it the Path Problem from now on.