I posted some half-baked thoughts on “narrative shifts” yesterday on twitter, and figured I’d share here as well. Over my 15 years in startups, I’ve seen three distinct umbrella narratives for the tech ecosystem. The first started around 2007 or 2008, with the launch the iPhone and App Store. This was an era where founders were underdogs, and tech was a force for good. The industry had finished licking its wounds from the dot-com crash, and was the first to rebound from the Great Recession. The combined platform shifts of cloud and mobile were transformative for consumers and businesses alike, and startups painted themselves as “democratizing” forces. Even the bigger players were seen as challengers—Steve Jobs is probably the best figurehead for the optimism of this era. With the 2016 election came an era of reckoning. There was widespread soul searching in the aftermath of Trump’s victory—had tech, and Facebook specifically, undermined democracy? The Me Too movement swept the industry in 2017. Travis Kalanick, a pioneer in the prior narrative, was ousted from his company by his own investors. Meanwhile, valuations kept going up, and the SPAC frenzy began. The pandemic initially looked like it might put an end to the party, but no—venture funding skyrocketed while companies grappled with demands for more equitable practices in the wake of BLM. Coinbase was a poster company for this tension: a phenomenal IPO, and unrest within its ranks. Sam Bankman-Fried tried to meet the moment with a carefully crafted do-gooder image, but became our perfect villain instead. I think our third era started last year…I’ll call this the anti-hero narrative. The bottoming out of the startup ecosystem gave founders “permission” to do what needed to be done: mostly, layoffs. The tone became unapologetic. Elon led the way, slashing Twitter’s workforce, espousing free speech (the more shocking, the better). The spirit feels gleefully combative: anti-media, anti-woke, anti-DEI. The ethos of e/acc captures this moment: technological progress is inevitable and we should run after it at all costs. Zuckerberg is back, rehabilitated from the prior era with his chain necklace. Jensen Huang wasn’t toppled from his throne for signing a woman’s chest; it made him shinier. Progress is what matters, how we get there matters less. It’s too early to declare this most recent narrative baked, but the vibes have shifted! And of course, no era describes any one company, and no era is all good or all bad. Why does all this matter? The stories we tell about ourselves, about our industry, shape our reality. They influence what kinds of ideas and founders are backed. Where talent flocks. Where we’re willing to suspend disbelief. This is an especially interesting and challenging phase we’re entering: the newly combative spirit of the tech industry, paired with an AI platform shift that’s going to transform every sector, disrupt labor markets, and touch the lives of consumers.
This so succinctly summarizes something seismic in not only how we craft and hear stories, but also (and more importantly, as you point out) what it means our reality, people and society . I've been sitting on thoughts around the devolving business ethics I've experienced firsthand in the shadow of (with the permission of?) models at 'the top.' The edge of cynicism and the fight-or-flight energy inspired by the combative spirit makes everything more exhausting and is impeding trust. And for folks who don't care about that from a human level, I think it will hit bottom lines as well. The gleeful laughter we heard from so many as SVB toppled was a good peek at where perception of The Valley (writ large) has shifted.
I love this … especially the point around why this matters. The stories we tell ourselves and each other DO matter. We often cast ourselves and each other as either the villain, the victim, or the hero. And the way we assign these roles gives an advantage to some over others. If we can engage in these narratives intentionally and thoughtfully, the way you are here, then collectively we’re more likely to have the impact we wanted to have on the world, rather than just going along with the whims and financial headwinds of the fortunate few. Thank you for sharing!
Trimming staff for profitability is not a kind of Batman or otherwise 'vigilante' kind of move. It's not 'anti hero' so much as 'not hero'. Twitter is unfortunately a dark cesspool of noise, Instagram is literally still driving young women to depression without remorse, and Jensen has nothing to do with any of that and nothing to apologize for, those folks are not in the same boat.
Glad you shared here too. I think the “where we’re willing to suspend disbelief” could be its own post. Love it!
I think this is such a smart take, Ashley. I also don't think it's a coincidence that the permissive, unapologetic, rehabilitative last phase you outline has a certain Trumpy quality to it. Like whatever you throw at them, it seems to annoyingly Teflon off and lead them to a win, anyway. (Eg Rippling after Zenefits; Flow after WeWork). The gleefulness you mention is perhaps the most distressing part. Excellent post - please keep sharing here!
Sarah Lacy
4w
This is super smart. I’d argue the early disruption days were more anti-hero than underdog… a huge wave of embracing your inner a-hole and breaking laws that I’d never seen in the valley. Pirates as arrington called it… I think it’s more about cycles that repeat with new iterations (and ferocity) than distinct shifts
Every time you write about tech, I'm jealous of how well you write about tech.
This is so well articulated. While I'm relieved that we've shifted from righteous & moralistic to pragmatic & unapologetic - there does seem to be something hyper-masculine about this current phase that I find concerning and sort of...regressive, in its own way.
Co-founder and GP at Coalition Operators
4wLonger winded version here: https://x.com/ashleymayer/status/1806393665646116935