Venkatesh Rao ☀️
@vgr
Used to be ~2016 that “Tech” was a cult-like coherent derp and techlash was a chaotic stream of confused critical commentary of very variable quality — mix of great insights and profound wrongness. Now it’s flipped. Tech is a chaotic stream of great and terrible ideas and Techlash is a cult-like coherent derp.
3 replies
1 recast
9 reactions
Venkatesh Rao ☀️
@vgr
In 2016 you could predict the contents of a tech-positive essay based just on the headline. All drew from the same well of VC-startup hustle porn and talking points. Now you can predict the contents of a techlash piece based on the headline.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Venkatesh Rao ☀️
@vgr
It’s an effect of institutionalization. In 2013-14, when I wrote my breaking smart essays, people were still working out the core arguments of tech positive worldviews and the critics were just starting to notice that it was worth engaging it. Everything being said was fresh. My essays still read mostly fine to me.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Venkatesh Rao ☀️
@vgr
By 2016, the tech positive ideas had been turned into an mindless techbro derp. Techlash ideas were just gaining maturity. Then 2017 happened, Techlashers went to town gleefully, tech positive crowd performed a defensive lobotomy on themselves in retreat.
2 replies
0 recast
2 reactions
Om Malik
@ommalik
Very astute observations. One of the key changing factors for the “tech lash” was the election of a certain president. Basically that day it was “everything was tech’s fault.” And NYT was the first to jump off the tech bandwagon. It was amazing to see from the sidelines.
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
Om Malik
@ommalik
On a more current note, the lack of understanding about actually tech was obvious in media before 2016, after 2016 and now. We went from John Markoff to Scott Gaalloway in tech media. I don’t have to say anything more
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
