Grapevine Consulting

I’m a bit late to the party with this but a friend told me about “Max-gate” and The Guardian travel blog and asked me what I thought so i did some reading up.

If you missed it:

• 19 year old writer Max (I’ll leave the surname so as not to contribute to his Google searches damage) starts a travel blog for The Guardian to share his experiences of a gap adventure
• Comments start flying thick and fast attacking the poor lad
• Online paranoia goes into overdrive as it’s “discovered” that Max’s dad has also written for the Guardian Travel Section
• Further conspiracy theories question, via Max’s work on the TV show ‘Skins’ and a bad URL, whether the whole thing is a PR stunt

I think, from my tone, you get where I sit on this. Sometimes the viciousness of online allowing everyone to have their say, particularly when it’s anonymous, really annoys me; this goes double when it’s a target like this. The guy wrote *one* post and people were all over him

1. I think levelling a charge that he’s “young, white and middle-class” and The Guardian should’ve known that would wind up their readers is laughable. We all know that newspapers have detailed demographics of their readership, both on- and off-line, and we all know where The Guardian audience sits…
2. Accusing his father of nepotism I also don’t find valid. It’s not like he was the section editor (he was at that stage an occasional freelancer for them) and again, let’s get real, do journalists not help out other journalists? Isn’t that just like any other industry? The fact that Max is a proven writer, having secured work on Skins etc, validates his work. I don’t feel disclosure is a huge issue here
3. With the dust settling we seem to be left with “it just wasn’t good writing”. Well, that’s the debatable and I would hope The Guardian is allowed some authority on determining this for themselves

Blog writers and readers have always tended towards the cynical, so negative comments is not unexpected. I *do* think it’s a shame that The Guardian didn’t give the blog a chance. In fact, as a PR, I think it looked like some sort of admission of error. They could’ve stood behind their decision to launch it and supported Max. (Heck, now I’m keen to have followed it for a bit and I bet I’m not the only one!)

Is it standard practise for publications to cancel columns after one response like this? I can’t be sure on everyone’s editorial policy but surely they could’ve seen how things progressed. Isn’t social media all about allowing discussion?

I went travelling when I was 19 and I kept a travel diary just like generations and generations before me. When I read it now I absolutely cringe, but it’s fun, it’s of its time. That age and those experiences are relevant to 1000s and 1000s of young UK people every year. The blogosphere is all about niches.

So if not all content appeals to all audiences was it right for The Guardian to try this? Well, why not? They’ve demonstrated leadership in trying new online content and I would think more than any other newspaper (except for maybe The Sun) a strong youth audience to grow.

Has anyone started selling “Team Max” t-shirts yet?

Read the official Guardian response here