Austin360 blogs > Digital Savant > Archives > 2008 > March > 09 > Entry
Zuckerberg keynote: audience turns on journalist
You’ll hear more about this later, but BusinessWeek columnist Sarah Lacy lost control of her interview with Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg and things got ugly.
Audience members began interjecting, others demanded the Q&A start early so as not to hear more of Lacy’s non-questions and finally the audience boo’d and applauded when Lacy tried to defend herself or when Zuckerberg dodged one of her questions or told her he’d answer them better if she asked some.
Zuckerberg didn’t seem to want to reveal much, but he seemed peeved that Lacy mentioned his site would be launching in France before Zuckerberg could make the announcement himself.
The audience revolution was not pretty. Lacy didn’t score points by plugging her book about Facebook (“You should read it,” she advised the 23-year-old billionaire) or by being very chummy, mentioning past interviews and a recent dinner.
UPDATE: Our video has been posted.
Were you at the keynote? What did you think? Please post a comment here and let us know.
Permalink | Comments (7) | Post your comment Categories: Austin, Internet, SXSW
Comments
Click here to report comment abuse.
By Blythe Christopher de Orive
March 11, 2008 10:42 AM | Link to this
I was mildly entertained by the interviewer at first hoping the the style of interview would help Mark Zuckerberg open up. The interview became more about the interviewer and I was appalled at her lack of professionalism. At one point, when bested by Mark, she claimed that on her show (on CNBC) she has thrown a glass of water on a guest. She was twirling her hair and generally using the interview platform to promote herself. I am glad the crowd finally got to ask some in-depth, interesting questions. I also don't buy the criticism that it was her gender that was part of the problem- I know plenty of intelligent, geek women who would have asked much more cogent questions.
By hayking
March 10, 2008 1:12 PM | Link to this
i think the key is missed opportunity. i admired the fact that the audience (who, let's not forget, paid a premium for the opportunity to attend) took control to let Zuckerberg speak. Lacey continually interrupted, beat her own chest, chastised him (i mean, seriously, she made fun of him about his age over and over), and basically ruined the chance to ask poignant question of a fascinating person. when i walked in i have to admit i didn't really think much of Mark Zuckerberg, but walked away with great admiration and wished he'd had a chance to articulate some ideas without Lacey's ignorant interference. in the end, it worked to his advantage, but still . . .
By Vanessa
March 10, 2008 11:21 AM | Link to this
I think the audience was led to "revolt" by a few people they idolize on twitter. It was absolutely disgusting to witness such blatant crowd think. The interview was not the best. The interviewer did spoil some things but I found her very personable and engaging. Zuckerburg was flat and repetative. I think the audience was prepared to dislike Sarah since she is not "one of them." It was sad and pathetic.
By Blake Stephenson
March 10, 2008 8:54 AM | Link to this
I am shocked that a person as clueless and self-centered as the interviewer was able to have the opportunity to interview Zuckerberg. What could have been an amazing hour learning about Mark's vision was instead infuriating and mediocre. I hope that she is never allowed to participate in SXSWi again.
By Cesar Torres
March 10, 2008 1:25 AM | Link to this
She did a fine job in form; it is very obvious that she has spoken in front of people and done large national interviews through the organizations she works for. Where she faltered was in the lack of empathy with her audience. She may not "get excited enough abt api's" [via her Twitter feed], but that was the fundamental problem.
While her interest might be in the financial aspect of a company (which frankly, we've all read about online with Facebook), ultimately who decided the context of the conversation was the users.
By Brenda Thompson
March 9, 2008 7:32 PM | Link to this
Around me (and on Twitter and Meebo), audience members were universally disgusted by the interviewer's self-centered, icky flirtatious manner and lame questions. It was embarassing and also a huge missed opportunity. It would have been great to have a truly skilled interviewer asking questions of this wunderkind of our time. Instead, we got self-promotion and mostly questions that weren't geared to the SXSW audience.
By paul a'barge
March 9, 2008 7:26 PM | Link to this
"audience revolution"? Does anyone edit this stuff anymore?