[jsrfded]

(I'm posting a comment I initially was privately drafting for ryan in an email.)

I posted the article - and included the embargo paras, which my co-founder and I nearly cut - because I thought the backstory would be useful/interesting to the folks there, who seemed to be unaware of the pr process during the prerelease of blekko. I wanted to open that up for them.

Your comment was spot-on good advice for the ycomb co's though. I voted it up.

Really irked that wsj broke our embargo. Irritated that I wasn't in the office when our site went live after 3.33 years, irritated that we didn't get to do the last bug-fix push to production, irritated that I knew TC wouldn't post, irritated that other journos would be irritated with me, irritated that it flatted the temporal curve on the launch pop. And for what?

Time-sync on stories is actually a good thing for the news stream. I don't see why journos don't get that.

[jkincaid]

FYI, The Wall Street Journal stopped honoring embargoes last year. Your PR firm knew this.

[evansolomon]

Jason, to be fair so did TechCrunch but you still honor embargoes often. Glass houses, ya know.

[jkincaid]

This is true, though to my knowledge if we agree to an embargo (as in, you ask, I actually say "Yes" as opposed to you just blasting a press release to my inbox) then we don't generally break them. At least that's my policy.

[evansolomon]

Not saying you lie about honoring them (I can personally say you never have lied to me about it), just that a public "we don't honor embargoes" stance isn't always a valid indictment.