Today, an international celebrity who was scheduled to perform at a local event did not show-up.  In a bid to "manage the crisis", the PR Team was called in to craft a News Release.

As with all Releases concerning multiple parties, the final draft was a collaborative process with the celebrity's management company proposing that the celebrity's absence be explained as "unavoidably delayed".  Realising that the celebrity had likely broken a legal agreement, the PR Team decided to consult the company's lawyers on the suitability of this statement.  Thankfully this was done and, on the advise of the lawyers, the word "unavoidably" was removed.  This was to prevent any potential wiggle-room for the celebrity to avoid paying the company compensation.

While the word "unavoidably" sounds like good PR Speak, it was designed to protect the interest of the celebrity.  As I explained in an earlier blog about the working relationship between reporters and PR Professionals, as PR Professionals we must also remember who is our pay-master.  This is no different even when we are dealing with other PR Professionals from other companies.
 
It is common in the PR world for News Releases (especially speeches) to be embargoed.  To add "weight" embargoes are usually accompanied by signed non-disclosure agreements (NDA).

While news organisations will generally abide by the embargoes, they are very often under pressure to "scoop" the story from under other news organisations.  Herein lies the challenge. 

In a recent national level event, a few reporters were given "exclusive access" to information which was embargoed with a NDA.  However, the reporter went on to do his own research and found embargoed information via open sources.  He eventually used this information and ran the story.

Upon analysis, it became clear that while the reporter was careful to stay within the NDA, his "exclusive access" to the bigger picture undoubtedly helped him piece the story together.  Thus, while he abided with the "letter" of the embargo, he broke the "sprit" of it.

To me, the lesson is clear.  Embargoes are useful but are not foolproof PR tools.  Embargoes should only be used as a last resort and, if used, organisations must be prepared to accept that they will be broken.