Yesterday I wrote a post explaining why I can't review one of my favorite films of the festival, "Mongolian Ping Pong." The film is under a press embargo because it hasn't been officially released. How I understand the concept of having a press review embargo is that the distributors are essentially doing the festival a favor by letting them have something unique. The concern is that local media not abiding by this request could hurt the relationship between the fest and the distributor.

Last night I noticed that the Isthmus, a festival sponsor, had written an in-depth review of the movie "Iron Island," also a embargoed film. It raises eyebrows until one realizes that the blog "This is really the last time" also reviewed the movie. Does that mean the embargo was broken?

It raises a question, should traditional media be expected to abide by the old rules when bloggers don't have to? One year ago this wouldn't have even been a consideration because "turn-around" media wasn't so developed in Madison. The Isthmus, State Journal and Cap Times would have all been expected to follow the request of the distributors. Have blogs eroded that element of control? Should the traditional media still stick to their guns - at least until a blogger breaks the embargo?

I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts.