Last week a journalist published an aggressive article on a couple of Spain’s leading digital entrepreneurs. The journalist, Analía Plaza, currently works as freelance for various media. The medium that published the article, El Confidencial, is arguably Spain’s most successful native digital newspaper. The Encinar brothers –Jesús and Fernando–, on the other hand, co-founded with César Oteiza Idealista.com back in 2000. The site quickly established itself as the go-to-place to find real estate online in Spain. It was sold to Apax Partners in 2015.
The journalist claimed (in Spanish) that following the sale of Idealista the Encinar brothers now controlled some of Spain’s for-rental residential properties with higher yields. The article made no allegation of legal wrongdoing. It was kind of calling the Encinar brothers out on a hypocrisy of sorts: making money taking advantage of their privileged position –accumulated capital and market knowledge– through business practices that don’t look pretty to some (i.e. restricting access to residential property in Madrid’s lower income neighborhoods pushing prices up). A bitter discussion ensued.
Jesús Encinar in fact replied to the article with a lengthy blog post (in Spanish too) denouncing several things. From a long list of factual inaccuracies to intent to inflict damage. And from hidden conflict of interest –apparently the company has just ended a sizeable advertising contract with El Confidencial– to betrayal of journalistic due process –denying that they had actually offered an alternative version before the piece had come out–.
This unfolded as I was beginning to read Conspiracy, Ryan Holiday’s new book on the Thiel vs. Gawker affair. The book has received mixed reviews, but I find its strong points far outweigh the weaker ones. It presents a fascinating account of a highly accomplished entrepreneur with a complex character, and the twists and turns of his decision to engage on a long-term project to exact revenge and shut down a medium that had hurt him in the past.
Among the gems in the story that serves as the book’s backbone, I count the attempted clarification on motive. Why did Thiel embark on this low probability mission? According to the story, it is not so much due to his rather anodyne public outing as guy as much as Gawker editor’s crazily unusual remark, below, in the comments section, suggesting that something must be wrong with Thiel and his reticence towards going on record about his sexuality.
That, apparently, was the spark that lit the fire. And beyond who is right and who is wrong considerations (with plenty to dissect in both cases, Thiel vs. Gawker and Encinar vs. El Confidencial), to me the more interesting idea here is indeed that around motive. I believe that when journalists deviate from the intent of contributing to the establishment of public truth they undermine the ethos of their profession, potentially setting off chains of events that rarely serve society. And, conversely, that when subjects being reported on let their egos get a hold of them and cloud their judgment, their ensuing actions become personal battles with their own agendas, which may be won or lost, but in any event undeserving of open public support.
