The risk there is, if a company is running a bunch of different blogs and 10 percent of the news in those various blogs is worth reporting, there's a good chance I -- as well as the members of the public at large -- will miss it amid the hundreds of messages showing in your mailbox or RSS reader. Especially if you're an investor or a journalist or a technophile trying to track the goings-on at many, many different companies.
Also, I imagine that at least some readers out there might not be fully content with a company's spin on whatever news it has to share and will still seek some analysis from their news source of choice.
Moreover, his argument that all the press releases Sun sends out are somehow rendered inaccessible by media outlets is, frankly, bogus. Yes, some news sites do require a paid subscription. Some are free but require only a login. And some are freely accessible (such as InfoWorld.com).
One of the interesting points raised in comments responding to Schwartz's entry is that blogs, RSS, and e-mail may not be the most secure means to sharing important information, either. What happens when someone convincingly spoofs an announcement from Sun (e.g. "Sun finds Solaris causes impotence in lab rats"), and it ends up in thousands of e-mail-boxes simultaneously without going through that dreaded media filter? It may suddenly be up to the media to help undo the damage.
Another commenter writes, "The one question that I have relates to archiving the blog info. It is one thing to publish information. It is another to be able to find it at a later date. "
Bottom line, though: I truly applaud Schwartz's desire to keep investors, customers, and the public apprised of important news. By all means, post them in your blog and make them available by RSS and e-mail as soon as you can.
But there's really no harm in CCing the press in the process. In fact, you could benefit from it. Sometimes, we might write something good about you.