– Startups – Matt Galligan CEO and Co-Founder, Circa #E349

NARRATOR: Distribution provided by CloudSigma. The cloud that adapts to you. Visit CloudSigma.com/ThisWeekIn for a free two hundred dollar credit. Today’s episode of “This Week in Startups” is brought to you by ShareFile from Citrix. Secure file transfer, built for business. Visit ShareFile.com, click on the microphone, and enter TWIST for a free thirty-day trial. And by New Relic. Visit NewRelic.com/TWIST and see why thousands of developers worldwide don’t deploy without it. JASON: Hey, everybody. Hey, everybody. It’s Jason Calacanis. And today, on the program, Matt Galligan is with me. And he is building a product that I’m absolutely addicted to, and that is incredibly relevant to what’s going on in the world today. It’s called Circa [http://cir.ca/]. Go ahead and download it uh… on your iPhone or iPad. And what he’s doing is revolutionizing the news process and how we consume it. It’s thumb- uh… driven. And I really think that he’s onto something very big, very very big. And it’s a true innovation in the space of news, where people think we need to innovate, because a lot of things are broken. uh… We are going to learn a lot this hour about starting a company, about a mobile-first company, and about the future of media. Stick with us. It’s gonna be a great episode. MUSIC MUSIC MUSIC MUSIC MUSIC MUSIC JASON: Hey, everybody. Hey, everybody. This is “This Week in Startups.” And, boy, I’m excited about today’s program, because on the program I have Matt Galligan, uh… who has made a great product, called Circa. That a lot of intelligent people are buzzing about. And, you know, I spent twenty years in the media business studying uh… and building editorial based products, and this is one of the few that I’ve seen on mobile, you know, along with Flipboard and very few others that I think is actually getting it right. And we are going to hear all about Circa today, uh… on the program, the design of it, the editorial approach, mobile first, all these important things. And if you’re an entrepreneur, you know, “This Week in Startups” is where we learn about great products, and building great companies, and trying to put a dent in the universe, taking a lot of risk by being a founder, and making something that, again, changes the world perhaps. And uh… most of the time as founders, we fail, but we try hard, and we try to do innovative stuff. And I’m really excited to talk about those innovative things. And before we do, let me just take a quick moment to pause for the cause and thank our partners. We’ll be right back. JASON’S AD: Hey, everybody. What a great interview we’re having here, uh… talking about Circa, and the future of news. And this show is brought to you by New Relic. And they are a great new service that I’ve been using for uh… a little while now. She is notů She is saying, “It’s a new service.” It’s a service that a lot of us in the industry have been using to monitor how our services, how our software, and how our services are doing. And it does it for me in real-time. And I get these email reports, which are great, because, you know, I actually don’t need to see in real-time myself. My people see it in real-time. I need to see a weekly report or a daily report, just to know that like Launch.co is up and running well, Thisweekin.com is running well, Mahalo.com is running well. I need to know Inside.com, when it launches in September, uh… is running well. And what they do isů Here, take a look at this report here. This is the um… real-time experience here. You could look at the code level, and the server level, performance of your app, so you can find that, “Oh, it’s dipping, it’s slower.” Why? And is that the page rendering, you know, how the page renders on your browser? Is that the web application, the software you’re using? Is that the network between your web application and the consumer on theů on the page rendering size… side? And you could see the average server response time here, under a hundred milliseconds. That’s great. The browser page load time’s three seconds. That’s not so good, uh… and it seems to have gotten slower, and we have to figure out why that is. Uhů Is it because of the cross queuing? Is that the network? Something happened here around 11:20, and then we can go look into that and figure out. It’s still within range of 2.9 seconds, but the browser load time, as you see here, that’s for… to completely low on the browser side, which is OK for to be three seconds, because there’s a lot of images, this is a long page. uh… And then, of course, I can see uh… what’s going on here. And one of the things where the specific pieces of the app that are taking time uh… to load, and the server resources, of course. What’s going on with the physical memory or the CPU? Obviously, the CPU on a lot of these web apps is, you know, very very low. And the memory is critically important. The disk utilization can be a major thing. And here’s your, you know, input/output. How your uh… uh… your NIC-card, your Network Interface Card’s doing? What you’re running a uhů uh… Ubuntu and, you know, how much RAM you got on the server? All this kinda great stuff that you need to know, that you’re running Ruby [on Rails] or [on] Nginx. Uh… And… We use it like I said here on all our stuff. They’ve got forty thousand customers right now, including Skullcandy, Spotify, Nike, Zillow, Vonage. All these great companies and developers across the spectrum trust their critical performance of their apps to New Relic. I betcha Circa uses it too. So uh… if you wanna super uh… paired visibility to all your mobile apps, sign up today, and you’ll get a free “This Week in Startups” shirt. That’s right, you got a TWiST shirt. Go to NewRelic.com/TWIST uhů Go to NewRelic.com/TWIST. OK. So just go to NewRelic .com /TWIST. It’s super fast, super easy and no credit card’s required. It’s a great product. Everybody’s using it. And I give them my highest uh… recommendation. And again, we only talk about products here, we’ve got six-month waiting list to advertise on “This Week in Startups,” because I’m doing it twice a week. And I’m not doing any more than that, I’m telling you right now. Two interviews [format] for me is great. When we got to three to four interviews a week, I’m just exhausted. Two is the perfect number. We are going to do a hundred episodes a year. Six months of ads sold out at a time, it’s fantastic, and it’s because the show is so great, the audience is so great, and the partners are so great. So when you hear this ad for New Relic, it’s like you’re hearing me giving you candid advice on what you should use to make your startup to run better. I won’t shill, I won’t tell you to use a product if it’s not absolutely awesome. New Relic is absolutely awesome. Let’s get back to this great interview. Matt is a fascinating guy and Circa is one of those news products, that I am obsessed with, it’s a great product. It’s a great interview, let’s keep going. JASON: Hey, everybody. We’re back. Thanks to our partners uh… for making this happen. Matt Galligan uh… of Circa is with us today. You can follow him on Twitter @mg. And you can go download his app, which is in the App Store. It’s called Circa. Matt, welcome to the program. MATT: Thanks for having me. JASON: Uh… You and I’ve talked about the product on Twitter. uh… and uh… You’ve been doing the Internet thing for a little while now. You did SimpleGeo, uh… sold it to Airship. Was that right? MATT: Urban Airship. JASON: Urban Airship bought it, and SimpleGeo was what? What was SimpleGeo for the audience who doesn’t know? He is like, “But you know what SimpleGeo is, Jay!” I wasů always have to tell people this at the beginning. I have to tell you two things. One, I’m going to ask questions that I know the answer to, don’t be thrown off by that like you just were. And number two, I’m going to ask questions uh… oh, ah… authenticity and honesty is the currency of the room. Thoseů So the people know, who watch the program, those are two things that I tell people before the show begins, but I forgot this time. So number one, I’m going to ask stupid questions sometimes, but for the benefit of the audience. And two, be honest in all things. OK. So tell us about SimpleGeo. What was SimpleGeo? What was the point of that? MATT: SimpleGeo was a developer infrastructure that made it easy for developers working on iPhone apps or other things to actually integrate location, and so it went well above and beyond things like Google maps, and made it easy to just integrate uh… contextual relevance to location, places, many different things, uh… but back-end ecosystem type stuff. JASON: And uh… [You] wind up getting [it] sold and then uh… you started Circa. I believe that was the order in which you did things. MATT: Yeah. I took a little bit of time off to kind of explore. I had a number of ideas that I was thinking through and working on, and ultimately kind of abandoned them, because they felt like they were just too contrivance. JASON: What were those contrived ideas? That’s always good, because this is a great thing for entrepreneurs to know, uhů you know, which babies to kill? Like… What… What did you kill and why? MATT: Yes. So I… I had a couple of ideas that… The one that I probably spent the most time on, was actually uh… a photo uh… app, that was going to take all the photos on all of your different networks, and put them into one place, and made them really easy to kind of consume, and flip through, and kind of rediscover. Now, it’s kinda good, because now, I’m seeing all of these come out. Uh… Cluster [getcluster.com] being one of them. Actually, my friend Brandon did. uh… But it seems that it’s going to be really crowded space very quickly, and I also couldn’t seem to find exactly what was going to make it a massive business. Uh… And, you know, having started two companies previously, I want to find an idea that I felt that I could build into a big long-term lasting company. JASON: And I guess after doing SimpleGeo, finding that product market fit and product founder fit was at the top of your mind. MATT: Absolutely. I mean, I’m… I’m a consumer guy, and SimpleGeo was not a consumer product. And so I felt like I needed to get back into the game with… with consumer [products]. JASON: So tell us what is Circa? I mean, how do you explain it? And we’ll play some video over your description of this… of the actual product. MATT: Sure. Soů Circa is a mobile native news uh… uh… app, well, company in general, but uhů our first uhů iteration is actually an iPhone app. And the idea behind it is, you know, you’ve got a handful of minutes here and there to be able to catch up on things. It’s this gap time that exists throughout the day. We don’t consume news quite the same way that we used to, where it would be forty minutes sitting down with a paper and a cup of coffee. Now, it’s you’re waiting in line for coffee, you’ve got five minutes, how do you keep up with everything and not readů incredibly lengthy articles, which is the way that most things get produced today? Soů It was first about creating a high-quality user experience and making it really easy to consume, but then it was about the content itself. How do you make uh… content mobile? And did… What we do is we have uh… an editorial team that takes big stories, the big breaking stories of the day, breaks them down into core facts, stats, you know, photos, things like that, what we call the atomic elements of news, and then presents them in a nice format, and thenů uh… So that makes it, so you can keep up really quickly, like catch-up very, very fast to any of the stories in the day. And then, the key feature that we have is… is the idea that you can follow news. And so, rather than writing an article day-in and day-out, we’re actually taking stories, letting them evolve over time, adding to them, building on them over time. And then as a user, I can follow them and get push notifications. JASON: And so, which story has been the most successful in terms of engagement and in terms of you tracking it? And I’m asking this uh… in uhů mid… uh… toward the end of April in 2013, for people who don’t know. MATT: Yeah. So the biggest story by far for us has been unfortunate Boston events of last week. Uh… It was… It was without doubt the uh… a crazy story that had many different evolutions and… and over the course of a week. And it uh… it all happened in very uh… in a very concentrated time period and so, uh… for us, what we consider to be a solid engagement is when we get followers around a story, and then whenever updates to that story happen and push onů a subsequent push notification. What does the activity look like after that? And it was just uh… crazy to see howů how much people were coming back, and back, and back to the… to the story. I know one of the stats that blew my mind uh… was between Monday and Friday of last week we had more than a handful of users opening the app a hundred times or more. JASON: Wow. And in a five-day period, which is twenty times a day on average. MATT: In five days. Yeah. JASON: Andů What does that speak to in terms of consumption of news and how that changes on mobile? MATT: Well I thinků JASON: Or how is it changed in general? MATT: You know that… that… that bit is a bit extreme, obviously, but I think that’s uhů you know, any app that can constantly re-engage a user, I think, is going to be really important, because, you know, you’ve got all of these apps on your phones, which one do you pick to go into? And having this “follow” feature means that we can stay, you know, in tight with the user and keep them coming back. JASON: Yeah. And so in that news case we heard a lot of criticism of media this week that media is broken. And that media did a bad job. Social media, communities like Reddit or 4Chan, even CNN people were blaming for doing that. It seemed like it was an equal com… condemnation of the entire media space… MATT: Right. JASON: …from social to message boards, to television, to newspapers. Do you agree that media’s broken and they did a bad job? Or do you think they did a tremendously good job? MATT: I think that there is a spectrum. JASON: OK. MATT: And I think that there was good and bad. I think that’s… it was aů an incredibly complex and difficult event to cover. uh… You have many different details coming out at many different times. And we’re also in this bizarre period with media where media in general, CNN as an example, is struggling to figure out, “How do we work with Twitter?” Is it, you know… Do we still try to be faster than Twitter in getting some of these details out? So I’ll mention it in the second, but you know there was a lot of misinformation. Uhů There was a lot ofů of just straight-up bad reporting, but I think that things worked pretty well, all things considered. JASON: Yeah. Intelligent people seem to think that the process, although, may be different than how we previously consumed this stuff, which would be like the day after or, maybe, we watch CNN Live. The process might be faster, or more spontaneous, or a little more dispersed, but overall people felt more informed, I think. MATT: I think so. I think the challenge is that you can’t just believe everything coming through on a Twitter stream. It’s happening in such real time that you can’tů You have to step back and realize, you know, there’s so much going on. Use Twitter as a tool, not as the… the end. JASON: Almost like “Be your own journalist.” MATT: Yeah, of course. And that’s something thatů JASON: Because you are seeing the sources in real-time. MATT: Right. JASON: In some cases. MATT: Well, in… in some cases the sources came from, you know, Reddit or things like that. It’s likeů It gets a little bit uh… JASON: Or it could be trolls just putting out false information, it could be people with agendas. MATT: Absolutely. Absolutely. And… And I think Reddit was interesting this week seeing how you had people kind of jumping on this like almost citizen investigation type stuff. Andů That’s inevitable, and that’s gonna keep happening. I think it’s how we react to that, that’s going to be important. Almost like, when an investigation is ongoing, you know, it should be behind closed doors, because you never know what kind of crazy misinformation might get out there and how it might affectů, like, truly affect the actual investigation. JASON: But some argue there’s no way for it to occur behind doors because the evidence and the people are occurring in real-time, in the example of the Michael Arrington and Jenn Allen [scandal], back and forth, you had one person claiming she was raped and beaten by one individual, and the other person saying they weren’t on Twitter. MATT: Right. JASON: Back and forth, and back and forth. They were acting this out, and it still doesn’t have a resolution. uh… They were acting this out in real-time uh… before the news even covered. MATT: In the public. JASON: In the public! So it can’t go back behind closed doors, it seems. MATT: I think it’s maybe then how it is reacted to by these news organizations after the fact. JASON: How should they react? Is there the best practice emerging? And how are you doing it? MATT: We’ll… We’llů We’ll… You know, I’ll spend a second on how we did it, but uh… you know, knock on wood for the future, but I can tell you that without a doubt uhů for the week of the coverage of Boston, Circa never ran a single inaccuracy at all. JASON: Wow. uh… How didů How did you manage that, because you were questioning? MATT: We questioned everything. First off, we don’t run a single thing uh… as a confirmed report, unless we’ve actually got like multiple sources confirming the exact same thing. And then, there are some things that get a little suspect, like when uh… some names started to get thrown out about a potential suspect for the Boston marathon bombing. You know, we were very uh… questioning as to whether or not it was true, we didn’t run it. And you know, if I look back at the chat logs on our… our… our news team has distributed, if I look back, you know, there’s a lot of arguments back and forth as to whether or not one detail gets run versus another, but we have a responsibility to tell the truth. And we know that Twitter is always going to be faster than us, and soů because we accept that, and we can slow down a little bit, andů and do our best to get the actual truth out there. JASON: So speed is important, but not the be-all and end-all for Circa. MATT: Yeah. Absolutely. And I think that’s a responsibility that any news organization should have now. It should be the ones that are confirming the reports and… and doing investigations on the reports, not just standing on the air reading tweets that they happen to be seen flying by. I think that’s doing a disservice to the people that are watching the news. JASON: Andů In this case, we had Reddit debating who could potentially have done uh… the bombing based upon uhů a photographic evidence. They did a remarkably good job at finding the people, and also finding people who happen to be carrying backpacks that were sagging that were innocent. MATT: It was really incredibleů JASON: How did you cover that? MATT: That… that’sů That’s an incredibly difficult situation. I think that uh… First off, we might cover the fact that it’s happening, and we might cover uh… the kinds of things that people are doing to discover uh… how this is working, but we’re not going to cover the people mentioned, and we’re not going to cover theů that… the data that they throw back and forth until it actually is something. JASON: And why… Why is that? Is there a benchmark when you would? You know, likeů So, let’s say in this specific example, “OK. Two people with backpacks are seen at three different locations, and there is a photographic evidence, and there’s multiple different angles, because that’s sort of what started to happen.” MATT: Sure. JASON: Is there a point, in which you say, “Reddit believes it’s closing in,” but don’t show the photos, or don’t mention the people? Or do you say, “Hey, Reddit feels like they are reaching consensus, and Reddit believes, these are the people,” and huge disclaimer here? MATT: I think if we can be forthcoming about what details are known, and you know, if it’sů if it’s something that will get resolved, I… Iů I think that we can stand out in front of it and help uh… debunk different things. Like, there is oneů uhů there’s one blog post, we threw out recently about uh… when uh… misinformation gets out there, it’s not just about not repeating that misinformation, but also uh… identifying that misinformation for your readers, and saying, “Hey. This was wrong,” because even if they got it from, you know, their news outlet, as a news organization, we may still have a responsibility to readers to debunk things that were reported inaccurate elsewhere. JASON: Ah. So this advocacy for the truth, advocacy for clarity for the user becomes the guiding principle. MATT: Absolutely. You cannot just rely on the fact that somebody is only reading you anymore, you know. You know, if it was a newspaper, you had that one newspaper, and that was your one source of truth. We’ve many sources of truth now. We can’t just trust the one source that we’re seeing. And as a news organization we can get out there in front of some of these problems and debunk things. And I think that leads to a greater responsibility to our readers. JASON: The design of the product is gorgeous, you’ve heard that before. Uhů MATT: Thank you. JASON: How important is the design and structure of the news to the experience today? MATT: Well, design around news has always been important. It… If you think about newspaper, I mean, newspapers were the pinnacle of… of, you know, typoů typography, and layout design, and all of these things. It’s like, “How do you get somebody compelled to read columns of text.” So when we decided that we wanted to do, you know, Circa and the various ways that we might to communicate news, we knew that design is gonna be of utmost importance. So I actually reached out to uh… uh… the person that designed my… my first uh… company’s uh… social thing. And he was, you know, seventeen at the time, when he was working on social thing with me. And we picked him up to work with me to do Circa’s design. And it’s been really interesting, because neither of us come from a background nor ever doing, you know, print design or newspaper. JASON: You can give him a shot up. I do not mind. MATT: Yeah. Timů Tim Shundo is a phenomenal designer. But I think that going forward, there’s a lot of things that are going… that need to be tried and experimented with, because a lot of how we’ve presented news so far, is great, but I think that a lot of opportunity to change andů and adapt, and do… and do something different than we’ve done in the past. JASON: I notice uh… the chunking of the news, which is really great. I’ve really liked that feature, where you can flip and get the next chunk, the next chunk. And obviously, uh… you can follow a topic. So if a new chunk, I just call them “chunks,” so if a new chunk comes in, you called them, I think, “facts” beforeů MATT: Points. JASON: Points! Yeah. So points, chunks. Uh… So a new point comes up, I get an alert. OK, because I was following uh… the SpaceX uh… or the Dragon capsule, so it was great, I can see the update. uh… This chunking that occurs, I notice that there’s not social media and discussion around the chunk. And I was just thinking, I would like to comment on a chunk. Is that something that would then be problematic for what you’re doing or would it be uh… creative to what you’re doing? MATT: I think it’s something we want to add. JASON: Yeah. MATT: It’s something where news or comments around news has… have historically been bad. JASON: Horrible. MATT: Like, the… the content itself is bad. It’s all about an ego game. It tends to get devolved, and things like that. So first off, like, we want to do it, we just have to find the right approach. And I think we found a really interesting way to… to think about these things. I think that people want a platform to talk about news, but I think that they want to do so in a way where it’s actually additive to the experience and not subtractive. Andů The way that we think about uh… commenting and things like that aroundů around our content is that our content is factual. It’s snappy. It’s to the point. We don’t add opinion. We don’t add bias. This is an opportunity for our users to bring up opinion and then, for us, to be able to surface those opinions. So that, you know, we’re good at where we’re good at. And then, we allow our readers to, you know, flesh out the opinion a little bit further. JASON: So if we are on a controversial topic, let’s say gun control, which I was following, uh… and you, guys, did a pretty solid job as well. You don’t have to take a position on, you know, is… our background checks are reasonable or not, you can state who’s opposed to it, what a background check is, how it’s defined, where the vote wound up, and let other peopleů MATT: Absolutely. JASON: … just fire away in the comments. MATT: Right, of course. JASON: It just gives you a little bit clarity on mission there. MATT: That’s the idea. JASON: All right. When we get back from a commercial break, uh… the sponsor break, the partner break, I want to talk about how you’re gonna make money, speaking of partners and uh… pauses for the cause. So let’s just take a quick break here uh… for our partnerĺs message. JASON’S AD: We want to take a moment from this great interview to talk about ShareFile by Citrix. It’s designed for business. And with ShareFile you can send files of almost any size securely. And we use it here at ThisWeekIn, Launch uh… and Inside.com to request files to get e-mail alerts when someone is uploading or downloading these files, and to share large video clips. You can see here how granular and uh… feature rich, and the surf rich [is the product]. You can see the top files that we’re sharing. uh… You can take a look at the uploads and the downloads, and people are editing and moving stuff around. Uh… You can do all this auditing of the activity log based on date. So you can say, “Hey, show me what’s going on in the last week, the last month, et cetera.” uh… And here’s how use it. Like, we get people to send their ads in, like here’s the Sourcebits spot, uh… and I can see who in our team has access to it. You can control that access on a pretty granular level, and it works really well. uh… So visit ShareFile.com, click on the radio microphone button, and use the promo code TWIST. That’s right. Go to ShareFile.com, ShareFile.com, click on the radio microphone button and use the promo code TWIST, no credit card required. Thirty-day free trial. You know what, we started a TWIST club, where you can gain access to a special video file. Yes, that’s right. We drop it right in your ShareFile [account]. It is the top ten questions, that I’ve ever been asked and answered on the three hundred fifty episodes or so of “This Week in Startups.” These are the ten best questions, and Kirin and the team put a lot of work into this. So step one, you signed up for ShareFile, and used the promo code TWIST, T_W_I_S_T. Step two, you just send us “a Request a File link” to [email protected] So you say, “Request a File link” to [email protected] It’s really easy, and this file is only available by those requesting it through ShareFile. So it’s a little special treat, we have for you. Thanks to our friends at ShareFile. Everybody, say, “Thank you, @sharefile uh… by @citrix” on their Twitter account. Thanks ShareFile for putting together a great product that you’re gonna really love and for making independent media like “This Week in Startups” possible. Let’s get back to our interview with Matt from Circa. JASON: And welcome back, everybody. Thank you to my partner for uh… one of my great partners, it was either ShareFile or New Relic, both of which products we use here, we love. Umů So,ů A large part of what’s wrong with media today seems to be the revenue model. We saw newspapers lose subscriptions to print, we saw them lose classified ads to Craigslist, and what’s left? Advertising. And they’re trying to reintroduce the subscription online to varying degrees of success, but obviously, the cost structure of large enterprises has just actually collapsed on itself. And we’re seeing every local newspaper is downsized if not shut down. uh… You, guys, are going to need to make money at some point. You’ve raised an angel round uhů uh… back in April of uh… 2012, oh, no, January, you did $750ků uhů in January, 2013, you did $750k, and $900k back in April. Soů You’re right now uhů doing angel investing thing, but at some point, something’s gonna have to pay the bills. MATT: Sure. JASON: Besides from investors, what that would be? MATT: I have a few different things that we’re thinking through, and a few different things, that we’re actually implementing or in the process of implementing. I… I think the way that we think about uh… news monetization is that, uh… you know, first off, news had the same monetization uh… tools for literally a hundred years, and all of a sudden, one day, they’re gone. It was like off a cliff. Andů Advertising being one of those things, in the way, that it gets done on the web is just these banner ads and things like that. That… Thatů I mean as a user, I become blind to it. JASON: Yeah. They are completely ineffective. MATT: It’s not an additive experience. And I think that advertising to me… When I think back to when advertising was… was high quality and… and… and something that people actually cared about. You know, you look at, and I use Mad Men as the example, you look at the Mad Men era where information was actually conveyed through advertising, because we didn’t have the Internet. And I couldn’t go on and search for what camera I should be buying, it was the ads that were telling me, which ads I should be buying. And so ads were something that was a medium to tell people, what should beů what should I purchase. JASON: Yeah. MATT: And that was an additive experience. Today it’s not at all. And so, the way that I think about advertising is actually on the lines, for instance, of what BuzzFeed is doing with sponsored content with native advertising. I think that there are ways toů you know, before… or forthcoming where user saying, “This is sponsored content, but still have something of value to somebody.” And those are some things that we’re thinking through with Circa: being able to do sponsored content, being able to getů to sponsor categories, you know, being able to still convey truthful news, but being able to do so in a way where we have, uh… you know, obviously partners in money coming in, to be able to develop that content. Andů that’s… That’s the first bit of what we’re thinking through. JASON: And native advertising, for the audience that may have just heard that term for the first time, it’s a relatively new term, under a year for people using that term. How do you define native advertising? MATT: I define native advertising as being able to tell a message, whether or not it is uh… paid for by the sponsor, and the story itself was paid for by the sponsor, or you pair a story with a sponsor, because it happens to be relevant to the… two uh… between the two. BuzzFeed has done a great job of this. And… And… The way that they’re doing it is you take your voice, you take your style, you take your design, you take everything that is internal, that people like about your particular company, uh… and then you develop an ad product around it. Uh… I think one of the best examples that I’ve seen is Uncrate, uh… which is a uh… blog for uh… stuff for guys. It’s like cars, and gadgets, and fashion, and things like that, but they did an amazing job with this, where uhů, you know, every week or so, they do a post, called Garb. And it’s an outfit. It’s just an outfit that you might find, you know, here’s a shirt, here’s some pants, and here’s some sunglasses. Every once in a while, it would be sponsored. So J. Crew will come in and say, “Here is Garb by J.Crew,” and it’s the same format, it’s the same kind of thing, uh… but now it’s all J.Crew material. JASON: Got it. MATT: It’s still additive, still useful for me to… as a userů JASON: Right. MATT: Uh… as a reader, but sponsored. JASON: And so, in a way, it’s more effective advertising for both, the seller and buyer in this case, sort of consumer, because it’s content. Right? MATT: Absolutely. JASON: It’s in a format, which people like. How clear do you feel people are being with uh… native advertising? Because it’s… when done well, is indistinguishable. You know, at its best, it’s indistinguishable from regular editorial, that’s if you do a great job. So therefore, are users going to be covertly advertised to? And you know, when I open my Facebook app on mobile and I see Intuit is liked by my friend, I thought that was actually genuine, and it actually said, “Sponsored” in light gray [font]. Are we.. Are people doing enough to make it clear in your mind? MATT: I think I’ve seen good and bad. I think BuzzFeed has done a great job. JASON: Have they? MATT: I think when you’re on the main page, and you’re scrolling through, certainly [they’ve done it]. uh… Once you… Let’s just say, once that gets out via social media, and you are coming to it through social media, I think it’s still delineated, but you’reů, you know, it doesn’t matter. Like, does it matter that when I’m scrolling through these pictures of cats that happen to be, you know, sponsored by Friskies? Like, does it matter that it’s actually uh… sponsored? Whether is it still interesting content? JASON: That’s aů like, I guess, a moral question. But you know, like, does it… Or that’s likeů Actually, that’s like an existential question, “Does it matter that was paid for or not?” Because it’s done so well. But I guess the question is, “Disclosure is, by the FTC, you know, necessary.” MATT: Sure. JASON: Right. We have this consumer protection, so you’re saying when you do see it in that main feed it clearly says, “Our partner post.” And I agree with that. Butů it’s a very astute and, you know, textured point, you’re making, which is, when you get a permalink page, and you just see ten cats, nobody would take the time to look forů [a sponsor]. It’s so tightly connected to the native editorial, that you wouldn’t even see that’s a partner post. MATT: The way that I wouldů The way, that I would like this is to something else going on today, is to think about movies and television, because if you were to watch a television show today, you’re probably being advertised to far more than you realize, because as soon as he pulls up, you know… I… I watched uh… Community uh… yest… a few days ago, the episode of Community, and I noticed that, because I’ve recently purchased one, but HTC One, which is a new Android device, a new flagship Android device, the principal… or… or the uh… uh… the dean of this college in this… in this show pulls one out of his pocket, and he’s using it on the show. Now… JASON: No. MATT: …that was paid for. There’s no question to me that that was paid for. JASON: But you’re assuming that. MATT: Well, I’m assuming that, but again, going back to how consumers seeů JASON: How would the consumer ever know? MATT: You know, consumers don’t know, you know. It’s like when… when uh… the car, that Tony driveů Tony Stark in Ironman drives, is an Audi R8. JASON: Yeah. MATT: Audi paid for that. JASON: Yeah. MATT: They paid for part of that movie to make that scene happen. And, you know, andů as a… as a consumer, do I, number one, care? It… It’s in there, it’s a cool product, or whatever it is. JASON: The R8 happened to be the car of the moment. MATT: It’s already happening in television, and film, and music, and music videos, and things like that. It’s inevitable that it’s going to make it. JASON: Should there be a disclosure? Like, when you see the car on the screen, should there be a little thing, that is a star that says that was paid for? MATT: I believe they were working on that in… in Europe in the UK, right? JASON: I’m not sure. MATT: Where there’s a little… is a little indicator that comes up an… as part of the screen, that says this is… this is sponsored or something like that. JASON: Wow! How annoying to the narrative that you’re watching a James bond film, and like when the Heineken in his hand or the BMW. MATT: Or the Breitling watch gets pulled out. It justů JASON: Oh! My God! You would have to have like a little floating pop-up video. MATT: Is… The question is like, “Is it additive? Does it matter? Do we care?” JASON: That’s an artistic question, isn’t it? MATT: I think so, but uh… you know, distinguishing, let’s say BuzzFeed content from the Atlantic debacle, if you remember theů JASON: Yeah. The Scientology and the tide. Describe it for those who don’t know. MATT: So there was a moment where there was a native advertising uh… bit done by the Atlantic that was Scientology and they were, uh… I don’t know, talking about their recent buildings that they had orů JASON: Their huge victories. MATT: And… Andů It was fascinatingů JASON: Because they were crashing it. MATT: Right, exactly. JASON: They are doing so well. MATT: That was the case where coming in from the Atlantic property, you would have known that that was a sponsored content. It was completely indistinguishable from their normal content, if you came into through social media. JASON: Right. MATT: So all of a sudden, it looked as though the Atlantic wasů JASON: …writing story. MATT: …fluffing up uh… about Scientology. JASON: Yeah. MATT: You know, and that is totally off brand for them, completely. And so that is an example, where I think the kind of content is what matters. JASON: I think, and maybe, I’m being a cynic, that they knew that was gonna occur, or at the very least, Scientology knew that was going to occur, or that they may have manufactured that controversy, because you just think about the amount of attention that got. It got a hundred times the attention, a thousand times the attention, perhaps, that it would have gotten, you know, if it hadn’t been so orthogonal to their brand, which is a brand that’s based on cynicism and truth, uh… which religion sort of is a target of, typically. MATT: I think it’s interesting. I… I… I couldn’t decide, one way or another, whether that actuallyů JASON: Did you think that too, that there was there a bit of like, “Let’s see if we can poke the tiger and push the envelope,” by somebody? MATT: I actually thought it was one hell of a flop. I don’t think that it wasů JASON: You just think it was a pure mistake. MATT: I think it was a pure mistake, and I think that it wasů it was a mistake, but I don’t think that they intended on getting likeů [scandal]. Whether or not it was intended or not. Uh… When you think about it, it’s social media that blew it up. It was the Faceů [Facebook], and then it became the cyclical thing, where it just blows up, and blows up, and blows up, and it gets hotter, and hotter, and hotter. And I think that that’s probably something that they didn’t intend. JASON: Yeah. I think that the Scientology marketing department had basically gamed or trolled the Atlantic. MATT: It’s possible. JASON: I think that they knew that it would get a disproportionate response, and maybe, even manufactured some of that kindling for the fire that eventually burned. MATT: It would be smart if that was the case. JASON: I think so. uh… And soů the… I could see though very well, that you’ve created this nice tight editorial format that, if BMW comes out with a new electric car, that following the electric car and seeing the updates as it goes that would be something that BMW would be pretty pleased with. MATT: Absolutely. I mean it creates a closed-loop relationship between the advertiser and the uh… and an individual being advertised to. And frankly, it’s interesting content. It shows intent, possibly, to purchase. So uh… you know, and as a… as a reader, if I actually care about this electric car thing, then, you know, why does it matter that I’m… that it’s an advertiser providing this information to me? I… I still think that I go back to the era of Mad Men, and think, you know, it is information. It’s information coming to me that might help me with my purchase patterns, whatever it is. It’s just something interesting to me. JASON: What of theů Ne… What is the New York Times or CNN think about what we’re doing? Obviously, when you got a startup that’s starting to innovate or clack teeth[?] like this, had… how did they look at you? I’m sure some of them have reached out. What is the mainstream media thought of your process, product? MATT: Well, the process… We’ll separate the process from the product. Um… You know, the product itself I think uh… JASON: ů on their radar? MATT: I’ve actually spoken with theů , you know, CNN, and the New York Times, and… and, you know, various heads over there, and I think that’sů uh.. they look at us with intrigue. I think that, you know, they… and… Andů I don’t want to uh… I don’t wanna say, “jealousy,” because that’s not the right word, but we were able to do something, that they are not able to do, because they have legacy. Right? They have a legacy business model. They have a legacyů JASON: Right. MATT: And I don’t mean like old. I just mean that they have things to worry about that our… that I don’t, frankly, have to worry about. Uh… And I can find new and interesting ways to do things and move much much faster, than a big behemoth of a news company. JASON: That has to get the Sunday Times out every Sunday… MATT: Absolutely. JASON: …for five million people. MATT: And they had to do their pitches. You know, all their editors pitching to, you know, who gets the lead, and, you knowů JASON: If anything, they’re jealous of your freedom. MATT: That is absolutely right. I had… I believe that is possible. JASON: Now, the format. When they look at the format, you’re not doing original reporting, you’re doing meta-reporting. MATT: We are doing original content. And… That’s the way that I would put it. Meta-reporting is actually a great way of putting it. JASON: Yeah. MATT: And I think that, when… when people look at it at face value, they think that we’re just doing straight sourcing, like, we’re taking one source, rewriting it a bit, and then sticking it into our… into our pieces, but that’s not it at all. And soů We actually go through a very traditional process. When we are developing our news, when we identify a story that needs to be written, our writers go out there and collect their sources that they think are most appropriate to put in there. And then they go and identify, you know, “Here are the five facts that we need to convey.” And they say on the point-by-point level, you know, “Here is one fact, and it’s corroborated by four sources.” And in ourů In our back-end, it’s actually supported in that way. JASON: Yeah. MATT: We… We require them to list every source with every single point. JASON: And you get that in light gray at the bottom of the update orů How is thatů[implemented]? MATT: There’s a little “i” button, and [by clicking] on the “i,” you can actually open up and see the sourcing for everything. JASON: Yeah. And soů Did they feel you are leveraging their product too much? How did they uh… You knowů Have you have theů How ů Do you get that sort of mainstream media disdain of “reblogging?” Because we did Engadget, and Autoblog, there wasů, and Joystiq, and bunch of these blogs, people felt like, “Oh, well. You’re riffing off of our ten thousand word article.” And on ten thousand word article, we might write five blog posts. Now we’ve got five items SEOed against one item, and we win the traffic war. MATT: Sure. JASON: And we’re writing it based on theirů [work]. There was this original, I don’t want to say, “disdained,” but they look down upon Engadget, a lot of the traditional, like, you know, tech journalists. Like, Peter Rojas was doing something like [disgusting], I don’t know. He… he was justů He was just giving his opinion. MATT: Sure. JASON: You know, he was just riffing on what they had already discovered, but his opinion was so much more interesting than their original reporting, that he built a huge brand off of it. How did they look at you reblogging them inů in that parlance, or rewriting them, or redigesting them, meta-reporting? MATT: Because it’s multiple-source [reporting], I don’t think they have the same kind of problem, that if we were to take one source, one story and tell it in a different way. And I think that it’s a very big distinction. And frankly, we haven’t had people reaching out to us and complaining specifically about that. We have some specific journalists that have been like, “I’m not sure about that,” and then we have a conversation with them, and they’re like, “OK. You’re… That’s actually pretty cool.” Uh… As far as the way that we collect our facts, the way that we put it together, the way that we put it out there. JASON: What was the reaction? You take me through an example without mentioning the journalists, but you know, how did they approach you? What did they say? MATT: Well, originally, you know, so this conversation has actually happened a few days ago with an individual, where they thought that we were inherently hiding, like, trying to prevent people from going to their original sources through our little button that you can click and see that. Now, we were like, first off, it’s not hiding, these are sources that we’re citing. Andů Those sources… It may be that one fact comes from four different places. Andů Is it valuable to the reader to know that that one fact was in these four places? Or is it that valuable for people to know the fact, and then for us to send people along to an appropriate place to read further? And soů JASON: Because you do have those little blurbs, where you’ll call it a New York Times [symbol]. MATT: Yes, absolutely. JASON: They feel like they’re getting some level of payback perhaps. MATT: That’s the idea. JASON: Some reciprocation from that. MATT: Yes. That’s the idea. JASON: But if you didn’t have that, boy, would they be upset? MATT: I think that would be hapů that would happen. JASON: Which is the Huffington Post uhů and Business Insider folks’ [problem]. That’s a valid concern [that] people have about their products. MATT: It does happen. Yeah. Single sourcing type stuff. Yes. JASON: Take a moment to mom and dad. Don’t worry about. Just easy at it. No worries. MATT: What’s that? I’ll just give you a call. JASON: Yeah, we’ll be out in ten minutes. Nothing to be sorry about. How’s he doing so far? Good conversation? SOMEBODY: Good one. JASON: You’re like, “Now I know what Circa is.” MATT: Or she is. JASON: Oh… it’s heartfelt, trust me. MATT: I see you in a sec. JASON: It’s so cute. MATT: She just want to see what I do. JASON: It’s so awesome and uh… I make sure we tell people to do that more often. Uh… So am… JASON: Let’s get back into that. [The] Huffington Post, really really…, and Business Insider too, when in their worst moments, which I would say, it’s probably, you know, like a third of their editorial, they’re simply cribbing other people’s stories, I mean, outright stealing, some people would call it. Do you agree with the stuff they do like that lower end? Obviously, like, you get Henry Blodget, or Arianna Huffington, or George Clooney writing some great piece, or I mean “great” is debated, but whatever, an opinion piece. So uh… that’s obviously valid original content, when they do that reblogging, and they out-SEO and out-social the original source, what do you think of that? MATT: I think it’s a hard question. Uh… JASON: What do you really think? I mean, come on! MATT: I mean personallyů JASON: You are a news guy. MATT: What… What I think I would prefer is, let’s just say, like a short snippet and traffic back. Uh… You know, something like what John Gruber does with uh… with his Daring Fireball stuff. So I… I… I like that kind of a link blogging type stuff, whereů where you’re sending traffic, you’re saying, “I’ve identified this interesting thing, here you go.” JASON: And, maybe, here’s my take on it. MATT: Sure. JASON: Because he does that perspective. MATT: But this sort of remix culture, this like sort of thing where even like Tumblr’s reblogging and stuff like that. Uh… Now, what’s great about Tumblr is they have built, into the product, attribution very cleverly, uh… where no matter what you can always find the original source of a particular reblog. It’s like they’re built into the metadata and it exists. The problem is that we don’t have that kind of thing inside of this… this ecosystem. Andů Sometimes it gets bad, because if you were to take a piece, that maybe had a factual inaccuracy behind it, and you copied that over and you reported on that, well, when that original piece gets updated, it does not update elsewhere. And so you can start to have some of these weird chains of events and, honestly, I think that stuff is gonna fall out. I think it’s going toů you know, I… I… I don’t think it’s a valuable medium right now. Uh… JASON: So it’s just trickery. It’s people trying to SEO game, to get a little bit extra traffic. Andů MATT: Hey, it worked. I mean, there is no question. Uh… And so now, the question isů JASON: Fake it till you make it. MATT: …was that… was that candy? Which is just taste good, and you just want more, and more, and more of it. Or how do we get something more substantial? JASON: It does feel like people are optimizing for wasting time. I mean you go to Business Insider. I’m not going to harp on Business Insider, but the two sites that did garner the most traffic, and BuzzFeed would be the third. They all seem to share in common this theft. Most… most journalists would call it theft, I believe, of other people’s IP under the auspices of fair use or “I rewrote it,” which you’re doing as well, rewriting, but for some reason, when they have executed on it, it feels like stealing. MATT: Well. JASON: Why does it leave such a bad taste in people’s mouth? MATT: Well. Uhů Distinguishing us from the… the rest of the process, it’s the single source piece. It’s the fact that there was one place, and they took that one bit of content and translated it, right? And in Circa’s case, it’s likeů it’s many different things, we’re identifying the fact, and then we’re creating our own thing. There was an interesting tool that came out, I think it was yesterday, I don’t even remember the name of it, but one of our engineers pointed it out. The idea that you could copy and paste something in, that let’s just say, it was a potential rewrite, and they would scour its database of news, and then figure out what the original place for that was. JASON: Right. By time stamp, or something. MATT: And it was just like, “OK. What words are they shifting around?” And stuff like that. So we actually were like, “Well. Let’s test ourselves!” And we threw some of our own news in there and it didn’t come up. Which meant that we’re doing a significantly good job inů , not… again, I don’t call it rewriting, but identifying a fact, and then producing content around that fact, and then going the extra step of citing resources. It’s very very different things, but I do think that when you take one source, remix it, and then put it back out there. That’s just not necessary something I’m too keen on. JASON: Yeah. And you seem to be very keen on a serious tone. uh… Do you think that that’s the opportunity? Or do you think the BuzzFeed kittens is the opportunity? I noticed a distinct lack of kittens. So, why no kittens? MATT: Well, you know I think that there are many different ways to take a product. I think that people are in a place where entertainment uhů feels good. You know, they just wanna feel good, and they want to see all these things. Now, uh… BuzzFeed does an interesting uh… a really interesting thing, where you can kind of get lost in this like very, you know, uh… kind of levity of just running through all these funny posts in cats and so on and so forth. And then, there’s one about gun control. Right? JASON: Yeah. MATT: And… And I think that that is sort of, like the Trojan horse for people, where it’s like, they’re just being entertained to, and I just think they’re being entertained to, and all of a sudden, there’s something serious. JASON: Yeah. MATT: And they’re still like, “Cool! Done. Got it. Read it.” Uh… And that’s awesome and I think that’s just a different angle of looking at. In our case, you know, it’s just not something that is core to our product. We want to get the news out there. We want to be a newspaper for people. We want to be some place that they can trust, that they can see, you know, whatever the news of the day is. And… And so, we want to be ultimately informative to our… to our readers, and so it just doesn’tů it just doesn’t aligned with our goals. JASON: Do you see yourself as a better version of the New York Times, [The] Washington Post, as opposed to a better version of Gawkerů MATT: Yes. JASON: …or BuzzFeed? MATT: We are a publication. Andů And that’s the way that I see it. JASON: And the people who you hire, they are doing this meta-reporting as I called it, but it’s deep research based reporting, is that a different type of traditional journalists? Who are you hiring to do this? What is the hiringů[process]? Who makes a good Circa journalist? MATT: They are journalists. These are people that have written for the Atlantic, have written for the LA times, you know, they came out of J-school. That you know, this isů These are the kind of people that we’re… we’re looking for, and… and these are guys that just want to inform the world, you know. We don’t have bylines in our products, and… and that’s part of it. Andů And part of the hiring process is making sure, “Hey, are you cool with no bylines?” JASON: And very [The] Economist’s [style], right? Like, The Economist doesn’t have bylines. MATT: Just like that. Yeah. And the idea is that these people are concerned around the overall uh… quality of the product, like, of all the news. Right? It’s just not their own contribution, but it’s the totality of all of their work together that they feel prideful about. And so, it is a different kind of journalists that we look for, but I can tell you that is without a doubt, you know, high-quality journalists that we’ve been hired. JASON: And at some point, do you tip over and do original reporting? And have those acts of random original reporting occurred already? MATT: I think that there are ways to do it. Uh… I think that though, the way that we think about it, is we’re trying to develop the most efficient ways of developing news, and we’ve already done that for our current uh… process. Reporting by nature is a highly inefficient process, and doing investigative reporting and things like that. So, how do we identify good ways of getting that done without it becoming a, you know, money pit, for example? And I think we’ve got some interesting ways, but it’s gonna be a little while before we can implement. JASON: Like, ask the question. He-he. Yeah. MATT: And that’s… That’s a very simple way of getting it done, butů JASON: I guess I just can see that, when you’re flipping through, just asking a question like, “Didů Is there somebody in the Circa audience who, you know, works at SpaceX, who would comment on this?” MATT: Sure. Opening up that… that… that wall, and… and… and providing an outlet, I… I… I think there are definitely opportunities. JASON: And so, who are the investors in the company? And… And what do you need to do to get it? And I know uh… Ben Huh from Cheezburger [Network] who has been one of the founders? MATT: Yes. JASON: What do you have to prove? And you raise another $750k just this year, that obviously, takes you about a year, I’m guessing, so what do you have to prove a year from now to get that big venture round? Because VCs, I’m a content guy too, obviously, uhů boy, did they hate news, boy, did they hate content. MATT: Yeah. uh… JASON: So angel investors you can line up real quick, but the news ů hmů [isn’t funded]. MATT: I think that we have to prove that things could be done differently. Uh… In our case, one of the things around content, specifically, is that we have found out that our modelů Traditional content production model’s linear, meaning that the more people I add behind it, the more… more news gets created, but it was always across the same line. Our content production ended up being exponential. We didn’t even know it. It just kinda happened that way. And that’s because when a story like the Lance Armstrong case happens, and we build one story to start, it’s five points, and then over time it’s like, oh, there’s one new update, we add one new point, and two weeks later, [we add] one new point. Everywhere else, they’re creating these boiler-plate five hundred or thousand-word pieces for every update, and so our process ends up being more efficient, because we add one new update, and go, and do the next story. One new update, go to the next story. And so rather than it being linear over time, the more of this basic content, that we develop the more it just draws that line up, it increases exponentially. So we’re trying to go in, when we talk to these investors and things like that, it’s about, “We’ve created an am… insanely efficient way of producing news and as a result of that, it turns out the reading experience is actually fantastic.” Which is the… JASON: It reminds me of Weblogs, Inc., where we actually told people, if you take the editor out, and you take two-thirds of the cost out, because editors are got to be paid twice as much as the writers, and the content turned out better, if it was a passionate writer. So when you got rid of Peter Rojas’ editor or Ryan Block’s [editor], they actually made better content, or Xeni Jardin from Boing Boing who worked for me for a long time, if youů if they weren’t edited, they were better. MATT: It’s a definitely interesting concept. Right? JASON: OK. We’re spending less money on their words, and the words are getting better. What just happened? MATT: If… if you can illustrate, you know, how you’re different, and how you’re taking things, that would otherwise be very inefficient about a content production model, and show, you know, “Hey, this can be done differently.” Then not only is it interesting from a company standpoint, but [also] it’s a disruptive thing. You know, it’s like everybody else is doing it this way, and they’re all tanking in different ways, but we’ve got this new angle on it, and then as a result we can succeed. So I… I… I think those are the kinds of messages we… we want to convey. JASON: Listen, Matt. It’s a… It’s a great product, and I’m a huge fan, and I’ve been using it and very impressed. Obviously, I’m building Inside.com, which is going to be in the news space as well, and not exactly the same, but uh… You know, I think it’s gonna be a whole cohort of people, Flipboard, I guess, yourselves, and uh… [is there] anything else? I mean, Flipboard, [is it] interesting? Yeah? MATT: Yes. Uh… If we think of Circa like a magazine… er.. like a newspaper, I think of Flipboard like a magazine, where just there’s lots of content for me to consume casually. And I think that they’re doing some interesting things with being able to curate, for instance, your own magazine. JASON: That’s a fascinating concept. MATT: It’s really interesting. JASON: I really think that was interesting. uh… Is there anybody else that you look at and say, “That’s fascinating and interesting?” Cause I… I get Circa and Flipboard, and then I go into my iPhone, and it’s a big long drop-off. MATT: I absolutely love Prismatic, actually. JASON: Prismatic. MATT: I think they do a fantastic job of identifying things that I would find interesting. Now again, it still feels like a magazine to me, where it’s just an endless amount of content that could be interesting to me, andů and I probably open up a story, you know, probably, five percent of the time, but it’s still interesting to go through and have it learned all these things, that I like, and then be able to find like the one gem of an article that I may not have seen elsewhere. So I useů I use Circa, Prismatic, uh… Flipboard, uh… a handful of other things, but those are the ones that I would concentrate on. JASON: Listen, Matt. This has been great. Everybody, uh… follow @mg and follow @circa on Twitter, and uh… download the app and play with it, it’s uh… Every two or three months a great update comes, and you’re making great progress, I think. God, just please don’t sell to the New York Times. I know they are trying to take you, guys, out early. I hope that you can raise that venture round, and really go for a long ball here, becauseů MATT: We got some really interesting things coming up, so Iů JASON: Awesome. All right. Don’t sell! MATT: He-he. JASON: Are youů Is thereů If the New York Times comes right now and provides the…, you know, whatever, 20X return for your investors, do you have to sell or are you long? MATT: Uh… I’ll be honest, I’m long on this business. You know, I’ve sold two companies before. Both of… you know. The first one was sold in fifteen months, the second one in twenty-four months. You know, I wanna build, I wanna prove that we can become the mobile news company in the same way that CNN came along and took the television format, made it their own, andů and develop that. We want to become synonymous with mobile news. We want to be the mobile news company. JASON: All right. Please, please, don’t give up. Iů Don’t sell! Please, don’t sell. MATT: I’ll do my best, Jason. JASON: Please, don’t sell, because I really think that, like, if this exists five years from now, it’s really gonna hit its stride in year four, five, and six. All right. And thanks to our sponsors: New Relic and ShareFile. Everybody, go thank @newrelic, thank @sharefile for sponsoring independent media like “This Week in Startups.” And you should go and support independent media like Circa. If you gotů If you worků If you’re an ad buyer for like, I don’t know, BMW, or Coca-Cola, or Red Bull, just get like your checkbook out, $50,000, experimental budget, give them 50 dimes, and let them play. It’s worth it, right, Matt? MATT: I think so. JASON: He-he. I see you next time on “This Week in Startups.”

, , , , , , , ,

Post navigation

6 thoughts on “– Startups – Matt Galligan CEO and Co-Founder, Circa #E349

  1. You made a mistake in your video description. The time stamps is in hours instead of minutes.

  2. that awkward moment when the dude says they will do exactly what jason and the others said it was cheaty and terrible on the last news roundtable: sponsored, tricky, undistinguishable advertising.

  3. gain, excellent interview with Matt, such a great and visionary guy; I just hope they come up soon with the Android app of Circa so they can rollout with world domination LOL

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *