In what ways do embargoes and exclusives leverage the MPR process? What are complications that may occur as a result of using these tactics?

What will be an ideal response?

Marketers often provide information to a connector before an organization wants a story to be released. Marketers usually engage in this practice of embargoing with the express agreement of the journalist to withhold publication of such information until a certain date. The purpose of an embargo is to give a connector time to assemble and prepare a story before it is formally announced. The outcome is a win-win situation for both marketer and connector. Ordinarily, embargoes depend on a certain level of mutual trust between a connector and a marketer. Unfortunately, some bloggers who receive news from marketers choose not to respect embargoed information and as a consequence have diluted the effectiveness of this tactic.

Marketers also provide journalists or media organizations with the right to publish a story before a firm breaks the news to competing outlets. In theory, such exclusivity gives a connector an advantage over other connectors who do not yet have access to such information. As a result, an organization might expect the journalist to cover its story in depth and do so in a way that reflects the organization's positioning. Nevertheless, the term exclusive does not always mean that a marketer reserves publication to solely one outlet. Marketers can share information among more than one connector - exclusively - so long as the connectors do not compete in overlapping markets and marketers advise these connectors of their intent to disseminate similar news to non-competing outlets.