User:Masem/Review embargoes

In entertainment, a review embargo is an agreement between the publishers of creative works, and the media and journalists that are invited to preview that work before its public release. Review embargoes are commonly used in the film and video game industry, but can also extend to other media.

Concept
Publishers desire to create consumer interest in a creative work before its official release. Some of this is through promotion and advertising, but another route is through critical reviews of the work by journalists and other media reviewers. These reviews are used by some consumers to judge if a work is worthy of spending the time and money to enjoy it. To take advantage of this promotional route, publishers will thus grant reviewers access to early or pre-release versions of a creative work, such as at a closed screening event or by being sent the work's media to review.

Uncontrolled, this system can create problems in promotion. A reviewer may give too much information away about a work at an early stage, which can affect the interest level of consumers and lower sales. Reviewer copies may end up being used for copyright infringement, allowing the work to be digitally downloaded before its official release. Reviewers may rush to be the first to publish a review for highly-anticipated works, which helps to draw an audience to their publication but may easily impact the opinions of consumers of the creative work and download reviews provided by other sources.

The review embargo concept is designed to mitigate some of these issues by the publisher while making a fairer opportunity for reviewers. In exchange for being able to preview the work and prepare a published review prior to the release date, the reviewer agrees to not publish that review until a specified time and date set by the publisher. These agreements may also stipulate aspects of what the reviewer may include, and can include contracts that legally bind the reviewer to not redistribute a screener copy to prevent infringement.

Review embargoes are generally informal agreements, not held to any legal contract law. To assure reviewers do not break embargoes, publishers will threaten to delay or pull any future pre-release copies to any reviewer that breaks release date or goes beyond other aspects of this agreement. However, some review embargoes have used legal contracts to hold the reviewer to this agreement.

When embargoes are set fairly, it is generally considered a positive situation for all sides. The publishers can reasonably time the date that the embargo is lifted as to create media interest just before the release which can help draw in more consumers. Reviewers are assured that their colleagues from other sources will not beat them in publishing a review, allowing them enough time to view and consume the pre-release work and write a thought-out review for it. Consumers benefit from having these reviews prior to the release to allow them to make informed decisions about the work.

In video games
Historically, vide″In entertainment, a review embargo is an agreement between the publishers of creative works, and the media and journalists that are invited to preview that work before its public release. Review embargoes are commonly used in the film and video game industry, but can also extend to other media.

Concept
Publishers desire to create consumer interest in a creative work before its official release. Some of this is through promotion and advertising, but another route is through critical reviews of the work by journalists and other media reviewers. These reviews are used by some consumers to judge if a work is worthy of spending the time and money to enjoy it. To take advantage of this promotional route, publishers will thus grant reviewers access to early or pre-release versions of a creative work, such as at a closed screening event or by being sent the work's media to review.

Uncontrolled, this system can create problems in promotion. A reviewer may give too much information away about a work at an early stage, which can affect the interest level of consumers and lower sales. Reviewer copies may end up being used for copyright infringement, allowing the work to be digitally downloaded before its official release. Reviewers may rush to be the first to publish a review for highly-anticipated works, which helps to draw an audience to their publication but may easily impact the opinions of consumers of the creative work and download reviews provided by other sources.

The review embargo concept is designed to mitigate some of these issues by the publisher while making a fairer opportunity for reviewers. In exchange for being able to preview the work and prepare a published review prior to the release date, the reviewer agrees to not publish that review until a specified time and date set by the publisher. These agreements may also stipulate aspects of what the reviewer may include, and can include contracts that legally bind the reviewer to not redistribute a screener copy to prevent infringement.

Review embargoes are generally informal agreements, not held to any legal contract law. To assure reviewers do not break embargoes, publishers will threaten to delay or pull any future pre-release copies to any reviewer that breaks release date or goes beyond other aspects of this agreement. However, some review embargoes have used legal contracts to hold the reviewer to this agreement.

When embargoes are set fairly, it is generally considered a positive situation for all sides. The publishers can reasonably time the date that the embargo is lifted as to create media interest just before the release which can help draw in more consumers. Reviewers are assured that their colleagues from other sources will not beat them in publishing a review, allowing them enough time to view and consume the pre-release work and write a thought-out review for it. Consumers benefit from having these reviews prior to the release to allow them to make informed decisions about the work.

In video games
Historically, vide