The Embargo Breaks: The Regurgitation of a Press Release

Cyndy Aleo-Carreira,


I missed an embargo lifting this morning.

It's happened on occasion when life has overtaken my planned schedule for testing and writing, or we've missed an email due to the enormous amount of spam that often comes into the address for pitches, but I would much rather miss being "one of the first" to review a new product or service than put out an article that shows little to no effort.

What is disappointing to me is the number of blogs I once revered who have no problem regurgitating press releases. It's obvious to those of us who've gotten the same press releases and press kits in our inboxes when you see the same quote pulled by a PR rep appear in an article.

The real question here is why those blogs bother covering a launch or release at all. There is a pressure there for the big blogs to cover everything, obviously, and I actually had a great conversation with Steve Spalding about it one evening about the current state of the tech blogosphere.

Our regular readers will notice that we have never posted 12 posts a day. The idea behind the blog is that any product we review is one we spend time with and really try to evaluate, comparing with any possible competitors in that space, and getting beyond the talking points sent out in the press release or the Powerpoint presentation.

I've been known to get a little cranky with PR people when I've been told that everything I need to know can be found in a press release, because nothing could be further from the truth. The press release is what a company WANTS a blogger to say. It doesn't drill down into any of the details that I think people DO want to know, and I can't think of a single time I've sat through a demo presentation and haven't had questions at the end.

It could be that in the quest for a larger reader base and mainstream acceptance, many blogs are willing to sacrifice the deeper coverage in order to cover all their bases. And there are a LOT of people out there who would probably rather skim bland articles quickly to catch up on all the news and move on rather than really think about it, or have their thoughts provoked. But I find myself doing a "mark all as read" far more often on the surface-level regurgitations on Embargo Lift Day than I do on smaller blogs with 1000-word pieces that really sit down and figure out what works and what doesn't for themselves.

Just last week, Sarah Perez referenced a study that suggested most people are just skimming the glut of information coming at them. To my way of thinking, that skimming is occurring because so much of the information is duplicated. How many times should I really want to read a paraphrased press release?

The StatBot just posted a Techmeme leaderboard for discussion links. If I do happen to actually peruse Techmeme, those are the links I head to for the most part, and I've learned which sources who regularly appear in those links I want to read. The reason is that I find that a lot of times, the headline article is the basic piece, and the discussion, which links to the headline as the source for the "news" actually analyzes it. Yuvi points out that Louis Gray calls many of those links "copy" links, but isn't the reverse actually true? The news is a copy of something that's heard. The discussion is often analysis. Which would you rather skim, and which would you rather sit down and read?

For Part Deux, visit SheGeeks today for my guest post