You're absolutely right about the growing animosity between PRs and journobloggers. That might not be a bad thing. Journalists SHOULD be more skeptical, although a more collegial tone wouldn't hurt.

For a great perspective on this, check out the post by the Wall St. Journal's Kara Swisher.

You're absolutely right about the growing animosity between PRs and journobloggers. That might not be a bad thing. Journalists SHOULD be more skeptical, although a more collegial tone wouldn't hurt.

For a great perspective on this, check out the post by the Wall St. Journal's Kara Swisher.

I don't know much about the journalism/PR world, but it seems that bloggers are throwing fits about PR people on a regular basis (myself included) and things are quickly evolving into an adversarial relationship. The smart journalists/flacks will survive.

I don't know much about the journalism/PR world, but it seems that bloggers are throwing fits about PR people on a regular basis (myself included) and things are quickly evolving into an adversarial relationship. The smart journalists/flacks will survive.

You're absolutely right about the growing animosity between PRs and journobloggers. That might not be a bad thing. Journalists SHOULD be more skeptical, although a more collegial tone wouldn't hurt.

I don't know much about the journalism/PR world, but it seems that bloggers are throwing fits about PR people on a regular basis (myself included) and things are quickly evolving into an adversarial relationship. The smart journalists/flacks will survive.

I DO have a problem with embargoes. If a PR man ever brought me a story and told me to hold it, I'd remind him that I make a living breaking news, not being a shill for his clients.

Still, I don't think the answer is to declare war on the entire PR industry. Michael Arrington WILL be a catalyst for change in the PR sector, especially in light of this discussion. But being a catalyst is nothing special. He had a chance here to be a leader, and I think he's missing a great opportunity.

The more I think about it, the more reasons I find to object to Arrington's post. And here's the biggie: He flat out says “We'll give you our word, then break our promise whenever we damn well please.” (paraphrased).

That crosses the line into ethical bankruptcy. I hope Arrington's financiers remember those words when he promises to repay his loans, or that his business partners remember them when he brokers new business deals.

Yes, absolutely the PR industry needs to evolve. And it's happening. Maybe not fast enough for Michael Arrington, but it's happening nonetheless.

There will always be tension between the media and the PR reps — as there should be. But that tension should be a healthy tension.

In the auto biz we see embargoes broken all the time, except it is by big sites looking to add pageviews and buzz about themselves. Not little fish looking to make a name.

PR people in the automotive realm aren't aggressive either. You have to go to them for the most part to get information. Even for big publications like mine. Anyway, I don't think it's wise for a PR professional to try and get even more argumentative over this topic. If you disagree I would think you could do it more diplomatically.