A reporter calls about your filing. She says she can run a story about it Thursday, but only if you agree to hold everything until then. Another reporter emails asking for an exclusive. A third wants a quote “on background.” None of these phrases are legally binding, but all of them carry real consequences if you get them wrong.
Attorneys spend years mastering courtroom terminology, but not always media terminology. A misunderstood word with a reporter can cost a firm a relationship it took years to build. Here’s what the terms actually mean, and how to use them to your advantage.
Embargo
An embargo is an agreement: a reporter gets information ahead of time, in exchange for holding publication until a set date and time. You might give a legal trade reporter your complaint 24 hours, or earlier, before filing so she has time to read it, call sources, and write something informed instead of rushed. She agrees not to publish until the embargo lifts, usually the moment the filing hits the docket. The key here is to make sure the reporter agrees before you actually share the filing.
Embargoes exist because good journalism takes time, and courts don’t wait for reporters. They let a story be accurate instead of first. But an embargo only works because reporters treat it as a professional obligation, not a contract. If you break one or hand the same material to a second reporter without saying it’s embargoed, you won’t get another one from that outlet. Set the terms in writing: what’s embargoed, until when, and who else has it.
Exclusive
An exclusive means one outlet gets the story before anyone else, full stop. There’s no ticking clock and no shared release time. You are simply choosing not to pitch the story anywhere else, at least for a defined window.
Firms offer exclusives to build relationships with reporters who cover their practice area regularly, or to land placement in an outlet whose readership matters more than the size of the eventual splash. The trade-off is real: an exclusive on a major verdict might mean one strong piece in the Times instead of five decent ones spread across outlets. Whether that trade is worth it depends on the goal. A firm chasing referral attorneys wants breadth. A firm building credibility with legal trades wants depth and a trusted byline. How to Pick the Right Events to Attend and similar strategic questions apply here too: know what you’re optimizing for before you decide who gets first access.
Hold for Release
“Hold for release,” or HFR, looks similar to an embargo but works differently. It’s usually a label on the release itself, not a negotiated agreement with a specific reporter. You send a release marked “hold for release until [date/time]” to a distribution list, and you’re trusting that whoever receives it respects the instruction. There’s no back-and-forth, no confirmation that the recipient agreed to the terms which means that it’s a request, not a deal.
This matters because an embargo protects you since a specific reporter agreed to specific terms (ideally prior to you providing them with the information or document that is under embargo); if they break it, they know there’s a cost. A hold-for-release label protects you only as far as the goodwill of whoever’s inbox it lands in. Use HFR when you’re distributing broadly and want to signal timing without expecting anyone to negotiate. Use an embargo when the story is significant enough that you need an actual commitment.
On the Record, On Background, and Off the Record
These three terms govern how what you say can be used, not when. On the record means anything you say can be published and attributed to you by name. On background means your information can be used, but not attributed to you directly, usually appearing as “a source familiar with the case” or similar. Off the record means the information can’t be used at all. It’s for your reporter’s understanding only.
These terms only carry weight when both sides agree to them before you start talking, not after. Say “off the record” after you’ve already said something quotable, and most reporters will tell you the moment has passed. We’ve written a full breakdown of how to navigate this conversation in What are the Differences Between On the Record, On Background, and Off the Record? if you want the deeper version.
Press Release vs. Pitch
A press release is a formal, written announcement, structured to answer the basic facts of a story: what happened, who’s involved, why it matters, and who to contact for more. It’s built to be picked up and run largely as-is, or to serve as a reference document a reporter can cite.
A pitch is different. It’s a direct, personal message to a specific reporter(s), making the case for why a particular story is worth their time. A good pitch doesn’t dump every fact of the case on a reporter. It gives them the single most compelling angle, tailored to what that reporter covers and who their readers are. Releases inform. Pitches can persuade. Many firms lean on releases because they feel more official, but for something that isn’t “X files lawsuit against Y” and requires more research or a specific angle, a pitch is often the better fit. We covered this at length in PR Is Not a Press Release, if you want to revisit before your next filing.
Press Conference
A press conference is a live, in-person or virtual event where multiple reporters get the same information and the same access to ask questions, at the same time. It makes sense when a story is big enough, and public enough, that no single outlet should have exclusive claim to it: a major verdict, a mass tort filing affecting thousands of plaintiffs, a settlement with public safety implications.
Press conferences can also be unforgiving. Every question is live, every answer is on the record unless stated otherwise beforehand, and there’s no editing pass before it airs. They work best when there’s real news to deliver and a spokesperson who’s prepared for follow-up questions, not just the read on a prepared statement. For most case updates, a well-placed exclusive or a tight pitch to the right reporter does more work with far less risk.
Why the Vocabulary Matters
None of these terms are complicated once you’ve used them a few times. What trips attorneys up isn’t the definition but using the wrong strategy for the situation: offering an exclusive when you want broad pickup, or assuming “off the record” protects something you already said out loud. Getting these terms right is a small thing that signals you understand how the media works to reporters, which makes the rest of the conversation easier.
If you’re not sure which approach fits your next filing, verdict, or settlement, that’s exactly the kind of call worth making before you pick up the phone with a reporter, not after.
Knowing the terms is the easy part. Knowing which one fits the case in front of you takes experience with reporters who cover this work. That’s what we do at RebuttalPR, and we only do it for plaintiffs’ attorneys. Reach out before your next filing goes out the door.
