Been an interesting two weeks media front, with a major Chrysler Press release broken from Embargo, culminating to the State of the Union speech by the President having it's embargo broken. *Embargo is a term journalists use to indicate some type of information, (be they photo's as in the case of the 2008 Viper for Chrysler, to articles and speeches) that cannot be delivered to the public until said embargo is alleviated. Matt Drudge, perenial pain in the ass for virtually everyone, broke the Union speech minutes after getting his hands on it (legally or otherwise is not yet clear). breaking a long time "gentlemans agreement" of "your word is bond". Sad this new internet controlled world is becoming when even a man's word means nothing. So Chrysler tonight, on the insiders network they have set up posted this (very late at night I might add): So yes, there is an issue and it is pertinant that it be resolved. People simply cannot say yes and mean no. If not for a mans (or womans) word, then what more are you? So I ask, in what ways can embargo's be enforced? Digitally encrypting/encoding ith signatures and "relavant information" photo's would be one way. But what about text items such as the Presidents speech? Or anything else that some asshat with a keyboard thinks is OK to break his "word is bond" just to get a few extra visitors?.. how can these things be enforced?
I believe traditionally the penalty for breaking an embargo was that you subsequently wouldn't receive any information prior to the event, giving your competitors a head start on reporting. The only other real alternative is for business (and the Whitehouse) to not distribute any material before they are willing to have it releases.
well not distributing information under embargo, at least for items such as the Union speech (et al) isn't reasonable. Drudge, apparently, got his leaked from a "legitimate" news source (think: an insider at cnn or something) and printed it. So the Whitehouse cannot really just find out since it's a text doc they released and there is no way (currently at least) to see if something gets copy/pasted. perhaps a way to embed a cookie (not with todays tech, but in the near future maybe) into one of the words? so that if it is copy/pasted like drudge did/does it can be tracked back somehow... I dont know, but there needs to be a way....
Usually if a media outlet proves that they can't be trusted to maintain an embargo the source won't work with that particular outlet again. In the case of car blogs working with car manufacturers, if Joe's Car Blog breaks an embargo with Toyota and shows photos of the new Toyota BeastWagon 2008, why would Toyota (or any other car manufacturer) ever want to work with Joe again? On the other side of the coin and in the case of the Drudge Report, he's made a name for himself never following up on stories when they're proven to be incorrect. Also, the Drudge Report rarely writes their own news story; instead they prefer to link to third-party websites. It's doubtful that Drudge would get his hand spanked for breaking the State of the Union speech since his outsider status is the reason why people visit that site in the first place. It all depends on what your website or blog is about, how much of your information comes from official channels and whether you want to take the risk of offending them and damaging your relationship with them for future stories.