Zuckerberg=Paris Hilton? To Blame for SXSW Interview?

Although most people are blaming journalist Sarah Lacy for the interview with Zuckerberg at SXSWi this week, ZDNet's Steve O'Hear says he blames Mr. Facebook himself--as well as the instant commentary of Twitter--for how wrong it went:

[...] Lacy might have done a better job. But Zuckerberg’s relentless attempts to stay on message and lack of charisma (on stage at least) is ultimately what killed it for me. However, I think another factor in the keynote’s downfall was the use of Twitter as a so-called ‘back channel’. With keynote attendees able to share live commentary instantly, a negative response can spread like wildfire in a profound way that is very different to what’s possible without such connectivity.

Chantelle Oliver at The Walrus (Canada's Magazine of the Year) reads into the event as an anti-feminist "Punk'd"-style stunt, comparing Zuckerberg to Paris Hilton, who recently punk'd the paparazzi with help from Ashton Kutcher:

[Lacy] had been punk’d by the newest would-be reality show: Cewebrity Priapus. Zuckerberg played the part of Paris Hilton and the audience was his shaman. Like Ashton poking fun at the paparazzi, Cewebrity’s producers are poking fun at the idea a woman journalist ought dare to question a cewebrity. Spurred into action by the recent reports of the feminization of the Internet the show actively defends the genitalia of founding fathers of social networking and their lemming sons.

Lacy is one of the only women reporting on tech, and seems pretty nonplussed in the afterwards of it all, talking about how it went.

Comments

[Urijah]

Incorrect usage of "nonplussed"--go back three spaces.

[Esther Kustanowitz]

Thanks for pointing that out, but as Wiktionary tells you, nonplussed means confused or bewildered, which does fit, as she was not really sure why people were reacting so loudly to what happened...