CATEGORIES
- WEB STARTUPS
- CONFERENCES
- WEB JOBS
- MICROSOFT
- INTERVIEWS
- VIDEO
- AMAZON
- ALL TOPICS
CONTRIBUTORS
Sarah Lacy – Why Is It So Hard To Say “I’m Sorry?”
I’ve been thinking recently about how the ability to go "live" may affect many careers. Using the Sarah Lacy/Mark Zuckerberg keynote as our example, I want to share some thoughts with you. Whether you are a blogger or an entrepreneur, the ability to recognize when you’ve screwed up is critical for success.
Unlike those watching from far away, I was actually there in the room, arrived nearly two hours early so I could sit in the front and get ready to live blog the event. I watched the room fill up, people standing along the sides, cropped down, chairs changed to couches and audio tests. The number of cameras snapping photos when Mark came out was simply amazing – in fact it seemed like a press conference with the number of photographers in the pit.
I was very much looking forward to the interview. I heard there would be no new news, so perhaps we could learn more about Facebook’s strategy and monetization plans. This was my second time watching Zuckerberg live; the first was at the half-interview, half-infomercial at TC40 where Zuckerberg announced fbFund.
The truth is that the interview was a disaster. We are past it now so let’s take a look at how it could have been handled better. And how Sarah could have saved face. Sarah was trying to win over the crowd at Mark’s expense. She made many condescending statements towards Mark throughout including her comment about his journals. I have a set of journals Sarah and Om Malik had a series of posts last year about his journals. In addition, Lacy kept repeating "Stahl moment", which was completely out of line. If you know your subject has x or y issue, then you work around it.
I am 100% certain that Sarah had no idea it was going downhill from minute 3. Had she realized what was going on, she would have changed course. I’ve heard reports that her live interview with Kevin Rose also didn’t go so well but I wasn’t there so I can’t comment.
When the crowd started to applaud when Mark said "you’ve got to ask questions" it was actually 45 minutes of growing displeasure with where the interview was moving. I wasn’t on Twitter as I was typing the live notes but I can assure you that the feeling was all around the room and 98% of the audience were not on Twitter. I am guessing that Sarah still didn’t realize what was going on and I absolutely feel horrible for her. Once she realized what was going on, she had two choices: act professionally or act like a young child who didn’t get her way. She chose the latter.
Her comments on stage including, "you try doing what im doing for a living, it’s not as easy as it looks" and "can someone email me and tell me why I sucked so bad", made the situation worse as she threw grease on the fire. When you are on stage and being heckled, just be professional and move on.
When she ran off stage after the keynote was over, she should have relaxed for a bit. After getting some air, she could have looked for feedback. Instead she ran to Twitter and said, "seriously screw all you guys. I did my best to ask a range of things." Not only did she piss off almost the entire audience during the event, she has just told me to fuck-off. Lacy’s Twitter statement makes me realize that I’ve just wasted three hours. These were hours that could have been spent out partying or at my friend’s session.
One of my mentors says, "perception equals reality". It doesn’t matter what’s right when people perceive something else is right. Before, during and after, Sarah had a variety of stopping points in which to change course and save face.
- When she realized that the audience wasn’t pleased and asked for Q/A, she could have just moved to it and not made the "woe is me" comments.
- She didn’t need to post on Twitter.
- She could have easily apologized to those who felt like they didn’t get their money’s worth from the interview.
- She could have posted a simple survey if she was really interested in feedback on what happened.
- When she was interviewed on camera that evening, she could have dropped the defensive bit and just made a simple statement about what happened and apologized.
- Lastly, before the event, she could have asked her readers what they would ask Mark. Instant winner with this one.
Brian Solis has posted a commentary on the situation including the following comment. "If you think she owes you an apology or needs to fall on the sword for her Q&A with Zuckerberg, don’t hold your breath. Sarah Lacy doesn’t need to apologize to anyone other than Mark." Wrong Brian, wrong. We were her customers and when your customers aren’t happy, you apologize and make it right. Customer is #1. Zuckerberg wasn’t the customer.
Here’s the net result and takeaway. When you screw up or your customers believe you have screwed up, apologize. And if you do apologize, mean it. It’s acceptable to admit when you make errors or miscalculations. What’s great about the Web is that we are all willing to help you back up. Just look at how many chances we’ve given Twitter.
As the world moves to "live", we all need a pause button. Blog attacks are so 2007. Today we have live Twitter attacks and outbursts. Who knows which attack or outburst might actually cause you to lose a deal, a client or worse? Keep thinking to yourself, "breathe before reply."
Sarah said on camera that the audience has ruined SXSW for ever getting a high level person again. I’d wonder if Sarah’s will get another chance at a keynote like the one at SXSW after her inability to apologize when her readers and viewers weren’t satisfied.
Sarah can still make it right. She could explain why the interview didn’t work and how she is working on changing for the future. I’d be interested in speaking with Sarah about her learnings, I am sure we could all benefit so we don’t make the same mistakes.
Update: It looks like that apology won’t be coming per Lacy’s article and Twitter message today.
looks like she didn’t learn yet.
http://www.techcrunch.com/2009/09/03/why-techcrunch-is-not-coming-to-brazil-after-all/
Interviews are not about expectations, especially yours. Sarah Lacy owes you nothing, I can’t believe you’re asking for an apology. I’m a big fan of Charlie Rose, some of his interviews blow me away, some bore me to tears. Sometimes you’ll get something out of it, sometimes you won’t. If you want Mark Zuckerberg so bad, get your own interview.
Interviews increase our understanding, hopefully. I wasn’t even there and this turned out to be one of the most interesting Web 2.0 interviews ever.
What did I get out of it? Mark Zuckerberg (appropriately at SXSW) gets painted a socially retarded rockstar robot. Are the investors hampering his ability to speak or is it the technology numbing his sensibilities? Young, super-wealthy, attractive, apparently from the hair twirling comments, people like you following his every move. Yet he’s painted socially retarded, we can only assume the technology is to blame. Does Mark Z. represent the endgame of Web 2.0? Facebook the Borg, our social skills reduced to binary yes/no logical answers, unable to interact with an actual woman, like he’s got a flowchart brain.
Your point that these “subclinical psychopaths,” these people who lack empathy, can “seem really nice at first” — this was really one of the main ideas behind my novel, Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep? (which Ridley Scott butchered and turned into the film Blade Runner).
The point was that They are out there, They look human, They act human, They might be attractive and witty and intelligent and charming but They lack One Thing that makes us human: empathy.
Empathy, the ability to see another human being in pain and feel that pain yourself. It’s what keeps people from saying things like “seriously, screw all you guys.”
Awesome analysis. Thanks!
Great post, this needed to be said.
wow – what a reply – thank you!
If Sarah had done her homework, she would have spent several days with a good Kindergarden teacher learning how to handle a bunch of spoiled children.
I wasn’t there, but after watching the interview, and reading some of the backstory (i.e. what the organizers ask of her – concentrate on business, no questions from the audience, etc. ), I think the problem wasn’t Lacy’s technique as much as it was the twitter reinforced mob mentality that took over.
There’s enough blame for everyone to have a share. IMO, it’s time to move on.
I was there. I was disgusted by her interview, but I was INFLAMED by her post-interview video response. Doesn’t she know the harder you go on yourself, the easier others will go on you? She should write an email to all SxSW attendees, saying, “alright, it was a crap performance – I watched it, and it sucked.” This would at least disarm some of our frustration. Then she could turn it into a project: asking those who were physically there to send her (via Frank Warren postcards) their “secrets” to her success. Who knows what she could do with all that opensource, consumer-generated content for conducting the perfect interview. It could at least be an upsell within her book.
Bottom line: Our capacity for forgiveness is almost as great as our distate for denial.
maybe it’s me but this debate is soooo tired. you’re obviously entitled to an opinion but there are so many more important things to talk/write about.
pretty much agree with your summary allen.
i felt bad for sarah when it happened, and i even personally felt a bit guilty i was one of the people calling her out & posting a criticism of her performance… but that said, i’d still say she she pretty much dug her own hole. amazingly, she appears to be so defensive / stuck on her own perspective that she is not at all apologetic, and doesn’t appear to admit anything was due to her lack of awareness or interview style, but rather due to everyone else / mark / the crowd / the “lack of innovation” / etc.
at this point it’s probably a very well-beaten dead horse, however i do think there are some takeaways for the rest of us (if not for sarah).
#1: the audience is more empowered than ever to participate in panel & conference discussions, whether organizers / interviewers like it or not. email, blogs, twitter, IRC, etc. all make it very easy for everyone to express their opinion.
#2: conference organizers, panel moderators, and interviewers would do well to involve the audience more in these discussions — before, during, & after. before they occur: survey the prospective audience & get their ideas on questions, discussion topics, etc. as it occurs: monitor the backchannel for feedback on how it’s going & adjust accordingly. after it’s done: check the blogosphere & tweets to see how you did, and again adjust in the future.
#3: for those who choose to stick their heads in the sand: beware. you can’t run, and you can’t hide. the audience will vote with their voices, and ultimately with their feet. better to embrace them & welcome them to the conversation, than to ignore them and get shouted down or trampled on.
as a blogger, conference organizer, & occasional speaker / panel moderator, i know there were a ton of lessons for me in what happened last week at sxsw. i hope i can learn from them & make the events that i’m involved with better. and if not, i’m sure i’ll hear about it.
onward & upward,
- dave mcclure
http://500hats.typepad.com
Allen, there’s a personality type that finds it almost impossible to apologize. When they do apologize, what they usually mean is not “I’m sorry for what I did or said,” but rather “I’m sorry YOUR perception of my perfection is so effed up.”
It’s called Narcissistic Personality Disorder.
Besides an inability to apologize, people with this disorder tend to be self-aggrandizing — promoting their books, for example, when it isn’t appropriate. Sound familiar?
There’s a really good article on NPD here:
http://www.ippnj.org/mcwilliams1.html
“Paradoxically, for all that the textbook narcissistic character is reputed to manifest exhibitionism, we have noticed that most narcissistically motivated people rarely boast. Rather, they ‘drop’ information in the form of a matter-of-fact report, ostensibly ordinary to the conveyer, that appears to be intended to elicit admiration without asking for it. A person not narcissistically defended might say, ‘I was so pleased to meet Erik Erikson,’ while the narcissistically impelled one causally alludes to his ‘lunch with Erik.’”
For example, casually dropping information like being friends with Zuckerberg since she was 19, having drinks with Zuckerberg, etc. She doesn’t ask Mark a question about Facebook and terrorism, instead, she makes a statement, saying, “The other day when we were talking and you were telling me about Facebook and terrorism.” (Which poor Zuckerborg has to parse into a question.) The point isn’t to solicit information, it’s to drive home the point about what good buddies we are with someone who’s worth 16 billion dollars.
“The readiness of narcissistically vulnerable people to convey criticism is equaled only by their resistance to assimilating it. Frequently, they seem to have mastered the art of deflecting blame.”
See
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-wyrny8PP-M
It’s not her fault: someone else told her NOT to do a Q&A; SXSW management admitted they never had anyone like Mark before; the people in the back got so angry they “ruined” SXSW, etc. etc. etc.
Very telling is when (after she gets done pointing fingers everywhere else) she admits she “gets this constantly.” Really? Does that tell you anything about Sarah Lacy? Of course not, it just goes to prove everyone else is messed up.
NPD is also characterized by a lack of EMPATHY. That’s why she was literally surprised at the audience’s reaction. She had no idea. Mark, alas, comes off as kind of robotic a lot, so for the two of them to be up on a stage talking about how Facebook facilitates EMPATHY is the most delicious sort of irony — sort of like a Vulcan panel discussion on human emotion.
There is lots of stuff on the web about NPD. The most important thing to remember is that there are people out there like that, who literally find it impossible to feel remorse or guilt. Some of them seem really nice at first.
You wrote, “Whether you are a blogger or an entrepreneur, the ability to recognize when you’ve screwed up is critical for success.” No, Allen, the ability to recognize when you’ve screwed up is critical for BEING NORMAL. (Or perhaps what you’d call a good neighbor, a decent human being, a mensch.) But people with NPD are subclinical psychopaths. They often have remarkable success as bloggers, entrepreneurs, business executives, politicians. You can go far in life when you truly believe all your mistakes are someone else’s fault.
I agree very much with what you wrote. I was also in the audience, and the thing that got me was she didn’t even realize what she did (and from her recent comments still doesn’t).
I was there and I enjoyed the interview until the audience attacked. Allen, I think you’ve gone to some length to be polite in articulating a perspective here (which I disagree with, for what it’s worth) but some of your commenters show the kind of attitude that created the atmosphere that day. Specifically, they are being assholes. Such assholes that I and several other people I talked to at the time (who were also there, assholes) said “wow, where is this amount of anger coming from?” I’ve got my theories where it came from but the level of discourse here makes me totally uninterested to discuss it publicly (I’d be happy to with you personally Allen) and in fact this whole incident has made me want to stop going to tech conferences in general.
very well said Chelsea – that was the point of this article – apologize and explain why you are doing so and how you have learned.
No only does her confidence and unwillingness to back down going to build her personal brand, but it is also kind of hot. She does not really owe anyone anything. At the end of the day, she does not need to please the social media elite. She is not playing the social media game, she just reports on it and uses it a little.
It seems like the comments from a couple of the people above are based on some video they saw.
Basically unless they were there, they should shut up. Watching an online video and basing your opinion off of that is pretty idiotic.
I was there, and she deserved to be heckled. She asked dumb questions, she talked way too much, and was too self-absorbed to realize this. The simple fact that she blames this on ‘twitter’ etc is indicative of how little she understands. I don’t use twitter, and I can tell you the feeling that the interview was going bad was palpable. EVERYONE THERE FELT IT WAS AWFUL.
So next time you decide to take sides on an issue, please actually know what you’re talking about. Basing your stupid opinion off a poorly recorded Web video is an indication of how totally retarded you are.
she did insult someone – she insulted Mark and she insulted the audience. And that was before they lost it.
Seriously.
I watched an annotated version of the interview, and the online gossip was getting snippy as early as 1:30 into the interview – at that point MZ was still thanking her for her setup question.
As far as the hair-twirling, some people need to go on a real salescall, and watch an agressively miniskirted saleswoman absolutely nail a deal with an older male client. Business is business, and all the “omg she’s flirting” angst was frankly baffling coming from a crowd of professionals. Establishing intimacy is one way to draw a shy person out of a shell.
The audience’s reaction was way WAY over the top, and I suspect Sarah quite justifiably feels that she was dogpiled.
“Sarah said on camera that the audience has ruined SXSW for ever getting a high level person again.”
This, of course, is completely backwards. In a week I’m not going to remember what conference this was, but I’ll remember Lacy’s interview. The audience didn’t ruin the conference; the interviewer ruined her own name.
I wonder how many of next year’s up-and-coming CEOs saw this interview on reddit/digg/HN/etc. and have mentally blacklisted Lacy already.
The only way I’d do a Lacy interview now is to come out guns blazing, so I could at least be known as the one who won’t take crap from anybody. I’d bring an air-horn to blow whenever she interrupted me (I might need two), and at the end I’d stand up and proudly put on an “I Survived a Sarah Lacy Interview” t-shirt.
So sad…Such a sad sad situation, and its getting more and more absurd. Elton John
I wasn’t there, but I have watched from the front row when Mike Arrington interviewed Zuckerberg, and again when John Battelle did. Neither interview was good…and it wasn’t the interviewer. Mark just doesn’t say much.
That said, Sarah could have handled this better. In the heat of the moment it is sometimes hard to read the audience perceptions. But…she certainly knew afterwards, and still maintains her stand.
I know Sarah and like her. She is a good journalist. But writing a compelling story, and interviewing someone live are two very different things. When it goes well it looks easy. Interviewing someone like Mark takes a lot of preparation and a LONG list of questions because you are likely to get very short answers.
I had the privilege of moderating a panel at MIX08. It was easy because I chose a panel of really smart, expressive, intersting people; Dave McClure, Robert Scoble, Kevin Rose, Ryan McIntyre, and Kimbal Musk. The hardest part was trying to give equal air time to these super stars.
The interviewee is the star of the show. When the interviwer or moderator becomes the focus…it usually isn’t pretty. Sarah took a risk in trying a different approach with Mark. It didn’t work. She dug a deeper hole by her reactions during and after the interview.
I think the big lesson here is to involve the audience right from the start. Invite them to ask questions ANYTIME during the interview…and recognize them immediately when they approach the mic.
The other obvious lesson is to always come prepared with LOTS of questions…more than you think you will need.
Thanks Marshall – my post is by no means an attack against Sarah – I am trying to provide a perspective on when it’s time to apologize and how to ask for feedback. We can all learn something from what happened.
I wasn’t on Twitter at all during the interview so I have no idea what went on there, but I know that the people around me weren’t happy after just a couple of minutes.
And where the heck were you the entire SXSW? I tried to find you and no matter what corner I turned, I couldn’t. After we only had a chance for a quick hello at blogworld, you were on my short list of people I wanted to have a good discussion with. Next year we need Twitter w/GPS enhancement :)
I would totally like to chat with you about it and get your perspective – maybe we can do a call this week. As for not coming to tech conferences, I think that would be a mistake – both for you as a presenter and as an attendee.
I was there. I paid $200 extra dollars to have two of my employees airlines tickets changed to be there (that fell through). I wanted to hear from the unpolished, geeky, “Markie Zee” himself. The modest 20something with rockstar status.
I knew Lacy was the wrong person for the interview within the first minutes when she said “go Spain!” regarding the recently released Spanish version of Facebook. At that moment, she immediately offended the rest of the Spanish speaking audience (no doubt mostly NOT from Spain).
My tweets (sent via my phone):
1:43 #sxsw this chump lady interviewing Mark needs to go find another career. We are not the financial crowd. Her approach needs a different tone
1:45 #sxsw mark’s interviewer.. wrote a book and is trying to promote it?
I give people chances and forgive HUGE misgivings with a sincere apology. When I read about her “screw you guys” tweet, I was completely taken aback.
Yes, I’d love for her to realize WHY so many people were offended, apologize, and grow personally and professionally.
To this crowd, the attendees, I want to see a video apology that’s out there on YouTube and the like (not just her website).
I’d still accept it, and rock on!
Oh look at me, I am so cool I was there and you weren’t so you know nothing.
Get a life, people can read as well as watch video, people also can tell if someone is being pigheaded.
This article is about her response to what went on.
If anyone is being a troll its your abrasive tone.
You wouldn’t say shit like this to peoples face so be civil here.
Honestly.
She has nothing to apologize for. I can’t imagine Matt Lauer being asked to apologize because he giggles when interviewing Salma Hayek. Had Sarah insulted someone, sure, but she was simply human enough to be hurt by what she saw as an unreasonable audience.
I can understand how the attendees wanted more than a puff piece, but it it clear that MZ was intent on working on “charm” and “humanity” more than he was on talking about hard tech. The continuing overreaction of the techochamber is many times more embarrassing than the interview we’ve all seen so many times by now.
She has nothing to apologize for. She can’t control the fact that Zuckerberg is devoid of personality and the ability to express himself engagingly and eloquently. Moreover, that fact that the audience expected a session (a geek focused session), the organizers had no intention of delivering from the beginning is not the fault of Sarah. She did what she was asked to do by the conference organizers. If you go to a movie expecting it to be something that it’s not, do you throw popcorn and demand an apology from the director and producers?
Great post allen.
Nevermind what she should do now. What would have made you happy in the interview?
Zuckerberg is borderline robotic anytime he speaks in public. If he doesn’t have an announcement, he’s not exactly one for witty banter.
Good interviewees have just as much of an opportunity to shape an interview as an interviewer does.
Allen, I vehemently disagree. Have we seen a single apology from anyone for the stuff said about her on Twitter? For heckling a journalist in front of a CEO? If we are going to talk about unprofessional behavior, let’s discuss what happened in the audience, because that certainly wasn’t professional. Why is the demand for apology so one-sided?
From what I have read this wasn’t the only session where the lunatics took over the asylum. Ms. Lacy was dead on when she said it was the Digg model; if adults act like petulant children, then they’ll get what they want. Personally, I don’t put up with that from my two-year-old and I certainly wouldn’t put up with it from a bunch of developers.
If you really want to hear about tech, a CEO is never going to be the person to give it to you. They don’t code; they steer the ship. And asking her readers? While she works for Yahoo, she’s a BusinessWeek reporter, and that audience would have asked the exact same questions that she was asking.
I’ve watched that video more times than I can count due to this endless rehashing, and I still come to the same conclusion; a group of adults acted like high school students at a boring assembly. Unfortunately, there’s no one around to give them detention or ask them for an apology, which I feel is owed both to Ms. Lacy as well as Mr. Zuckerberg. I didn’t see him Twittering about or heckling his interviewer.
Yeah I totally agree you need to admit when you are wrong, or at least be mature enough to take critism.
Insane how she doesn’t back down one inch. You can either call it stubborn or determined. :)
Great post, Allen!