The number one reason for embargoes — IMHO — is to manage a PR campaign, primarily as an attempt to generate “buzz” around some pseudo news event. Forcing journalists to wait and then unleash their articles all at once creates the impression that something is important, and getting them to agree effectively forces them to write about it.

Bottom line: embargoes are a farce. They are not about respect, they are about manipulation.

Matt’s comment is not incorrect either and I’d like to highlight another side of PR that is really working to change his perception and the shared perception of others.

I can tell you honestly, that as a hands-on PR person for 17 years, I’ve only used embargoes for important news and each campaign was absolutely rooted in respect in order to build or nurture long-term relationships.

Allowing journalists and bloggers adequate time to prepare is critical. We’re not the only people with news. Why wouldn’t we try to work within their busy schedule in order to have a shot at earning coverage? And, we all know that once a press release or the news is made public, no one wants to pay attention anyway.

I’m not alone in this either. Many of us realize that there isn’t any value in the short-term. I’m a HUGE proponent of the “less is more” embargo strategy to try to 1) demonstrate appreciation for those we want to work with – it’s different with each type of announcement we feel is truly “news worthy” as is the audiences it’s best suited. 2) To reduce or eliminate the chance that someone might break the embargo by running early (usually by mistake, sometimes we learn the hard way though.)

Attn PR people, please read this post and Matt’s comment. This is what you’re up against and there’s a reason why PR hasn’t enjoyed the best reputation for quite sometime.

If you’re in PR and would like to learn how to do this the right way, without burning bridges, please read two free ebooks that I’ve written on the subject:

The Art and Science of Public Relations

>PR Tips for Startups

If anything, embargoing a press release diminishes the buzz; if you already know something’s going to happen, where’s the excitement? As for “effectively forcing” a journo to write about something? Can’t speak for the US, but here in the UK, that would never happen. PR’s don’t *force* journos to write up a story, whatever they may like to think.

I’ve sat on both sides of the PR/journalist fence, and see the advantages of an embargo for both.

For the PR, yes, it allows them to manage a campaign more easily – across old and new media, with differing deadlines. So I will conceed there’s an element of control (not manipulation) there.

For journos, it does give them time to dig into a story before it goes ‘live’ so to speak. Especially with rolling deadlines, a little notice of a story ‘breaking’ allows you to get some background, find a new angle, arrange that interview with the CEO to flesh out the story etc.

So, whilst you may argue that embargoes are a farce, I politely but firmly beg to differ.

RB

@Mathew, like the position @Ross describes, I’ve been both a flack and journalist, so I’ve been on both sides, as well.

And I’ve been lucky enough to maintain embargo relationships that provided both parties with something to gain.

You have a point. There are always folks who will use attempt to use the position to force the situation. So maybe I should have said it “should be” about respect.

But to @Ross’ point, it takes two to tango.

I’ll make sure to focus on the respect angle when I write the “how to” portion.

Thanks to both you and @Ross for chiming in so quickly. Much appreciated.

I would much prefer reading actual news than those, and I think there’s plenty out there beyond reprinting releases. I don’t really care if that’s just the way it’s done, if I found a tech blog that reported more and rewrote less, I’d be all over it.

I’ve also never broken an embargo. I remember all too well from being on the marketing side what a PITA it was. Of course, when I was ON the marketing side, I also didn’t need to deal with people who wield a great deal of influence (won’t mention any names) who regularly broke the embargoes either (usually the same names).

For some of us, embargoes level the playing field and allow us to publish an article at the same time as the big guys that may end up having a different viewpoint or more time spent with the product. For others, it’s nothing more than a gate holding back the horses at the start that’s just there to jump over.