[Infowarrior] - How Apple Does Controlled Leaks

[Richard Forno]

How Apple Does Controlled Leaks
January 5th, 2010 at 1:22 PM - by John Martellaro

http://www.macobserver.com/tmo/article/how_apple_does_controlled_leaks/
Monday's article at the Wall Street Journal, which provided  
confirmation of an Apple tablet device, had all the earmarks of a  
controlled leak. Here's how Apple does it.

Often Apple has a need to let information out, unofficially. The  
company has been doing that for years, and it helps preserve Apple's  
consistent, official reputation for never talking about unreleased  
products. I know, because when I was a Senior Marketing Manager at  
Apple, I was instructed to do some controlled leaks.

The way it works is that a senior exec will come in and say, "We need  
to release this specific information. John, do you have a trusted  
friend at a major outlet? If so, call him/her and have a conversation.  
Idly mention this information and suggest that if it were published,  
that would be nice. No e-mails!"

The communication is always done in person or on the phone. Never via  
e-mail. That's so that if there's ever any dispute about what  
transpired, there's no paper trail to contradict either party's  
version of the story. Both sides can maintain plausible deniability  
and simply claim a misunderstanding. That protects Apple and the  
publication.

In the case of yesterday's story, Walt Mossberg was bypassed so that  
Mr. Mossberg would remain above the fray, above reproach. Also, two  
journalists at the WSJ were involved. That way, each one could point  
the finger at the other and claim, "I thought he told me to run with  
this story! Sorry."

Finally, the story was posted online late Monday, eastern time, so no  
one could ever suggest there was any attempt to manipulate the stock  
market.

The net result is that Apple gets the desired information published by  
a major Wall Street news outlet, but can always claim, if required, it  
was all an editorial misunderstanding. The WSJ is protected as well.

__________________

Controlled leaks are almost always the solution to a problem. In this  
case, it could have been that Apple needed to release the tablet  
information early because they wanted:

	• to light a fire under a recalcitrant partner
	• to float the idea of the US$1,000 price point and gauge reaction
	• to panic/confuse a potential competitor about whom Apple had some  
knowledge
	• to whet analyst and observer expectations to make sure the right  
kind and number of people show up at the (presumed) January 26 event.  
Apple hates empty seats and demands SRO at these events.

Of course, if Wall Street draws the right conclusions, and AAPL goes  
up, as it has, then everybody benefits. But the manipulation of stock  
is never the purpose. It's simply a favorable outcome of the process.  
Again, Apple is protected.

That's how Apple does controlled leaks, and the WSJ article from  
yesterday was a classic example.