Michael Arrington's assertion that TechCrunch and its related properties will no longer honor embargoes is a Trojan horse, a red herring, a diversionary tactic. He says, in this much-discussed blog post, "Death to the Embargo," that TechCrunch is done with embargoes because everyone breaks them already, and there are virtually no consequences. The new policy for Arrington and company is to lie to vendors. They'll agree to embargoes and then break them at will.

Arrington spends a fair amount of the post moaning about how PR reps hound you at this time of the year: "Today, PR firms email a story to us as many as 20 times." Well, boo hoo. We get a ton of pitches too, but usually not a fusillade of e-mails and calls for a single product. Instead, our mailboxes fill up with interesting--and not so interesting--pitches for all kinds of products. We respond to many pitches, but reps know that if we don't respond, it usually means, "No, we're not interested."

Still, there's a certain odd naiveté about Arrington's post. It's like he's not yet used to dealing with PR firms. How could that be? Isn't he a... Oh, wait: He's not a journalist. He's just a super-smart and powerful guy who is now at the epicenter of Internet business information and is, via CrunchGear, squeezing his way into product coverage. But he doesn't understand that it's the job of a journalist to deal with PR firms, to work on and maintain relationships, not to dictate the terms of the relationship.

Arrington's policy is in effect now and could impact any company that has or will deal with TechCrunch. The aim, says, Arrington, is to effect change. "Maybe if we cause enough pain then PR firms will start to take action against those publications that break the rules."

This is total BS.

Arrington's real reason for this post and policy is to try to squeeze out his competition....

He reveals the rotten center of his plan in this key passage: "We will honor embargoes from trusted companies and PR firms who give us the news exclusively, so we know there won't be any mistakes." And there you have it. Arrington simply wants exclusives.

I really didn't start writing this to talk about Arrington. Sure, he's manipulative and couldn't care less about how things have worked in the past between the tech industry and tech journalists. He's probably half right. Some old rules do need to change, but not the one revolving around embargoes (also called non-disclosure agreements or NDAs).

Embargoes help companies: They can tell their story in confidence and get valuable feedback before they deliver their message to their world. Embargoes help PCMag: We get early word and are prepared to tell the story in a timely manner. Embargoes also help you, the site visitor: When we say yes to an embargo, it ensures us access not only to that information, but future information. If we stop, PCMag has less information and will no longer be your favorite place for product and technology information. Yes, in other words, we do this for you.

That's why I'm going to state PCMag Digital Network's official policy in this blog post (Gearlog is part of the network).

PCMag Digital Network (which includes PCMag.com, ExtremeTech, Gearlog.com, Appscout.com and other Web sites and digital properties) will never knowingly break an embargo agreement (whether written or spoken). Moreover, PCMag Digital Network will happily honor exclusives and welcomes them, but we will not treat those who offer us exclusives any differently than any other company that puts its precious embargoes in our hands.

You have our word on it.

You don't have Arrington's.