Aaron Zamost, the head of communications at Square, has articulated an interesting theory about the forces that govern the tech press. Basically, it boils down to this: Coverage of all tech companies follows a pre-existing narrative arc that waxes and wanes with the fortunes of the businesses.
Here’s how he puts it:
A company’s narrative moves like a clock: it starts at midnight, ticking off the hours. The tone and sentiment about how a business is doing move from positive (sunrise, midday) to negative (dusk, darkness). And often the story returns to midnight, rebirth and a new day.
By way of example, he cites media coverage of a variety of different companies, from Meerkat to Facebook to Uber. If the company’s any good, the tech press begins to heap attention onto the industry’s latest “shiny new toy,” (think Reserve) but that praise eventually curdles as the company gains traction. By the time a company gets to 7 p.m. in “Silicon Valley Time,” the press begins to raise questions about its superiority (he cites Twitter as a current example) before plunging to its media nadir at the 11 p.m. hour.
As Zamost notes, this coverage arc isn’t limited to tech journalism. Many nonfiction and fiction stories follow a narrative template known as the hero’s journey, a quest from strength to weakness and back again.
As for how flaks can deal with journalists who fall into this pattern, Zamost advises patience and prudence:
Don’t yell at reporters for doing their job — it gets you nowhere. Just take the punch and move on.
