Blog coverage: necessary for start-ups to survive?

During the weekend, most people have time to reflect, even tech bloggers. Ok, maybe not all tech bloggers, but those who aren’t that sleep-deprived have a few hours to think about the meaning of life and all that. So may I please claim 15 minutes or so from that time?

The thing is, I’ve stumbled upon a post by ReadWriteWeb’s Josh Catone in which he discusses the need of blog coverage for start-ups. He has come across a lifestreaming service called Mugshot. After some research he found out that Mugshot has been around for two years. He then wonders why FriendFeed has become so booming while Mugshot is still relatively unknown. The answer is, of course, blog coverage. FriendFeed is beloved by blogging giants as Arrington and Scoble, which geek wouldn’t want to follow them?

Yet this theory isn’t always true. Yahoo! Photos received less media attention than Flickr though it was bigger than the later acquired service. So here’s his conclusion:

It would appear that the tech blog echochamber has the potential to work against new services targeted at early adopters. If a new service relies on early adopters, it appears that it will only have a chance if it can get love from early adopter blogs.

It reminded me of a discussion we sometimes have here at the office about whether we should cover start-ups that don’t have any traction yet. You know the type: the only user generated content is from the founders and some friends. To write or not to write? I’m facing this dilemma every day and most of the times base my decision on the idea, UI, and design. Since even really early stage start-ups deserve attention if the quality is high enough.

What do you think? Do you consider it to be annoying when you come across start-ups here that don’t have any traction yet? Or do you think it’s interesting? Please share your thoughts in the comments.