In the UK (and perhaps elsewhere) it is common for politicians to publish speeches ahead of the speech itself, leading to news articles such as the following:


The UK will leave the EU at 23:00 GMT, ending 47 years of membership. In a video message to be released an hour earlier, Prime Minister Boris Johnson will call Brexit - which follows more than three years of political wrangling - a "new dawn". "The most important thing to say tonight is that this is not an end but a beginning," he will say in a message filmed in Downing Street. "This is the moment when the dawn breaks and the curtain goes up on a new act. It is a moment of real national renewal and change."

What is the point in this? If the speech is published ahead of time then it seems to me the speech itself is redundant and merely consists of reading out loud from a text that is already available to everyone. Especially when, as in this case, it is simply a pre-recorded video. Why not just refer to the pre-release as the actual speech, and be done with it?

  • Looks to me like a teaser. It's not the full video message that is published in advance, or is it? Jan 31, 2020 at 20:51
  • Okay it wasn't just a teaser, it was the full speech which was rather short. More like a soundbyte but apparently enough to quote from for the newspapers. Feb 1, 2020 at 12:09

1 Answer 1


My guess would be that this is a marketing technique by the politicians. The policition wants to achieve two things:

  • a lot of people will listen/see the speech live on TV
  • the next day newspapers should have articles about the speech in it

That means that the speech will be given in the evening which is too late for journalists to listen to it and write an article about it that appears in the newspaper the next morning. So the journalists get the speech already some time during the day so they get more time.

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .