The problems are two-fold:a) Unethical or opportunistic bloggers or reporters looking for an edge will breaka story ahead of the agreed-upon embargo, even if only by one minute, in order to appear as if they got the scoop.b) PR, continuing to use a broadcast methodology to pitch and place news, freelyand foolishly wield embargoes as if they're simply "scheduled" times for a pressrelease to cross a wire.According to Michael Arrington, "The reason this is becoming a larger problem isbecause there is no downside to breaking embargoes. The PR firm gets upsetbut they don’t stop working with the offending publication or writer. You get a slapon the wrist, and you break another embargo later that day. Our new policy is tobreak
embargo. We’ll happily agree to whatever you ask of us, and thenwe’ll just do whatever we feel like right after that. We may break an embargo byone minute or three days. We’ll choose at random. There will be exceptions. Wewill honor embargoes from trusted companies and PR firms who give us thenews exclusively."In the comments section of the TechCrunch post, Richard MacManus, Editor-In-Chief of another popular tech blog,ReadWriteWeb, commented on a particular portion of the new policy, which sparked an open dialogue between MacManusand Arrington.MacManus, “
There will be exceptions. We will honor embargoes from trusted companies and PR firms who give us the news exclusively
. Nice."Arrington, "Actually Richard, you guys (ReadWriteWeb) and others like GigaOmare the good guys. I have no[t] problem working with you."