News Embargoes - Will They Become a Thing of the Past in a Web 2.0 World?

December 22, 2008 | Posted by: Tom Rice

Michael Arrington's rant to the PR agency world on 12/17 certainly caused a major uproar over Twitter and in the blogosphere. After getting burned on a story from a competitor, he lashed out and proclaimed that TechCrunch will no longer honor embargoes from PR people. At the end, he went on to name a few exceptions of course (such as Microsoft and Google PR and a few trusted confidants) but his message was clear - publicity hungry tech companies are putting too much pressure on their PR firms to get as much coverage as possible through these embargoes. And, in turn, many publications/sites have become nonchalant about breaking them and not really suffering any consequences. This in turn has screwed folks like him who have fully honored embargoes over the years. So he's had his say, but after all this, what's really the shakeout and are embargoes becoming a thing of the past?

This certainly isn't anything new - many journalists/publications have come out before saying they don't honor embargoes for the same reasons. Arrington's word certainly carries a lot of weight though. The way the media landscape has evolved - from the print to online world and to a more global readership, no doubt that embargoes are tougher to enforce and ask for.

Asking the WSJ.com to hold an embargo to 8:01am ET can be viewed as narrow sighted since only a portion of their readers are in that time zone to get the news at that maximum effect time. Also, it's well known that the traditional weekly tech trades are decreasing the frequency of their print editions or going totally online. The days of getting news pitched to a reporter before their Thursday weekly deadline are long gone almost. Publications/sites also are super hungry these days for readers/ad revenue so they're going to take more risks in breaking embargoes and getting the scoop first - worrying about PR people with hurt feelings can come later.

Personally, and I'm biased of course, but I love the embargo process as long as everyone's on the same page with it. It works beautifully when it works right and creates the maximum impact for the client. However, times have changed and PR people just have to adapt and have to work with their clients to adapt and make the right choices. Whether it's focusing on getting one exclusive story with one major publication or just saying embargoes be damned and just give everyone dibs on the news, everything needs to be on the table and fully vetted.

It all goes back to helping our client contacts get out in front of major announcements as early as possible and plotting out strategy, objectives and timeline so that everyone is on the same page and expectations are set. Not every announcement needs an "embargo strategy" so it's our job to help customize the right plan. Easier said than done sometimes but it will ensure better success.