Are Web sites not bound by AP embargoes?

I ask because I see this on the wire ...

Then I see it on Fox Sports/MSN less than three hours later ... http://msn.foxsports.com/soccer/story/7608020

This isn't the first time it's happened. Are those "For release ..." lines merely suggestions by the AP?

 

If I'm a power that be at a member paper, I'd be pissed that a media outlet is breaking the embargo...

 

I believe there are different levels of suggestion to hold a story.

This one, the "For release" is obviously something AP wants members to hold until a certain date.

AP also has one with the screamin' big head EMBARGOED UNTIL and a specific time.

In the "For release" instance, it does seem to be at least bad form if not a violation for a member to broadcast or publish it before the date.

What happens if the embargo is broken? AP send a hitman to the shop to whack someone?

 

Could also cut off their AP wire for a certain amount of time.
Even though I like the hitman idea better...

 

We don't even see some of that "For release" information in the feed we get here, nor (necessarily) the raw Stats Inc. feed that it comes from.

I think the differentiation between a "for weekend editions" line and a strict embargo to prevent somebody getting a competive edge on a big story is probably on the mark.

 

Perhaps it could be the handiwork of automation.

 

I suspect that's it.

The stuff that explicitly says "HOLD FOR RELEASE" doesn't get out before it's supposed to, or else.

 

I can see that.

But when I'm budgeting the weekend sections with stuff from the AP Features Digest, I sure don't like seeing it already floating around the Web.

 

After yesterday, I would be afraid to post anything on an AP-related thread.

 

I prefer the handiwork of Automotion: