How Apple Orchestrates Controlled Leaks, and Why

Lanxon writes "'I was a Senior Marketing Manager at Apple and I was instructed to do some controlled leaks,' confesses John Martellaro. 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. 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!'"

Comments

duh?

[falcon5768]

Thats how they all do it. Hell its even how the government does it. This isnt news, its well known common practice. Thats why its always fun when Apple goes after someone about a leak. Because in those situations, you KNOW Apple didnt authorize the leak and it makes you snicker.

Re:duh?

[bondsbw]

"OMG Apple does what everyone else does..."

Not really. Most companies freely brag about their unreleased products in order to gain hype. Apple has everybody else brag about their products to gain hype. That keeps them legit and makes it hard to accuse them of announcing vaporware.

Re:duh?

[Cronock]

I think it also gives Apple a way to test reaction to its products without ever promising anything. That and along with the very active Apple news/rumor sites create a culture that just gets people exited about products, and builds anticipation. I'm sure often these leaks are red herrings too, which keep the "sources" from being accurate often enough to be trusted.

Re:duh?

[elrous0]

With all these flamebait mods, I can't help but picture a legion of hipster-wannabe Mac fanboys with mod points glaring at their MacBook screens, caressing their iPhones like rosaries, all mumbling "How DARE they insult Father Steve!!!" in unison in every juice bar in America.

Re:duh?

[Sophira]

Except that they shut Think Secret down, remember?

Re:duh?

[falcon5768]

But that goes to my other point. It was obvious Think Secret from the getgo was getting TRUE insider information, and not controlled leaks, as they leaked products that NEVER made it to market sometimes and it did cause Apple a lot of trouble.

Re:duh?

[interiot]

Sure, it's good business sense to get consumer/reviewer reaction before investing all the money required to develop a product. But again, this has been standard practice among corporations and politicians for a while.

Re:duh?

[Idaho]

Not really. Most companies freely brag about their unreleased products in order to gain hype. Apple has everybody else brag about their products to gain hype.

Exactly, a perfect example can be found here. Look how the article says "Microsoft and H.P. to Reveal Slate PC Ahead of Apple", and then proceeds with "The slate will be made by Hewlett-Packard and possibly available by mid-year, these people said."

Possibly available by mid-year. Right. It's the typical Microsoft strategy of announcing a product before the competitor, hoping that this will deter people from buying the competitors product. At least when Apple announces anything, you know you can order it from the Apple store the next day.

Re:duh?

[Dorkmaster Flek]

I don't think he meant literally the next day, but his point is valid. When Apple announces something, it doesn't disappear after many delays as vaporware.

Re:duh?

[Tom]

The iPhone was announced on January 9, 2007. It went on sale on June 29, 2007.

And on the day it was announced, Steve apologized for this unusual early disclosure and explained why they did it. Of course you remember, don't you? After all, you could remember the date (I couldn't).

Re:duh?

[tlhIngan]

At least when Apple announces anything, you know you can order it from the Apple store the next day.

The iPhone was announced on January 9, 2007. It went on sale on June 29, 2007.

But hey, don't let a little thing like reality get in the way of your faith.

That's because the FCC was going to "leak" it first if it wasn't announced. It's part of FCC policy. And heck, the FCC bent to Apple in allowing the documents describing the iPhone (manuals, RF tests, photos inside and out, etc) be held confidential until after the announcement. Then everyone went nuts on the FCC's website downloading manuals and photos and all that.

Hell, there are people whose sole daily activity involve scanning the FCC database for new products and publishing the results - it's how we find out about new cellphones and gadgets way before they're announced.

But hey, never let a little government regulation get in the way of a good argument.

Re:duh?

[nine-times]

They actually said in that case that they were announcing early because they had to file papers with the FCC, which would essentially make the product public knowledge anyway.

The other time that they frequently announce products ahead of release is OS upgrades, but that's usually done around the time they're starting to release developer builds of the OS.

Another Apple Trick

[eldavojohn]

Say Jobs wants to fire someone but he doesn't want to lose them to another company. So he calls up the manager or whoever and asks him to do a 'controlled leak' for him via cellphone at Devil's Slough near Cupertino and wants to meet him there at 3am but come alone and no e-mails, no mention of this to anyone, no sort of traceability just to cover our asses because, hey, this is a controlled leak, right? But he asks the guy to stop at a random pub and buy Steve a bottle of their finest alcohol.

So the guy shows up and there's Steve walking along the railroad tracks above Devil's Slough. Well, when the guy approaches him, Steve hands him a cell phone and takes the bottle of liquor. Depending on how much Steve likes the bottle of liquor is how Steve proceeds next. If he likes it, he lets the man realize the cellphone is just an iPhone shell and Steve embraces him as Steve injects him with pentobarbital and gently lets him fall to his death in the slough. Now if Steve doesn't like the bottle, he pulls out his chic white iDesert Eagle and puts one in the back of each of the guy's legs gangland style. Then he usually taunts and complains about the bottle the guy brought him before roundhousing him to the head off the railroad tracks. He usually finishes it with a really bad hollywood-esque pun (ex. "consider your employment terminated!") and holds the gun sideways to look badass. Either way the guy just becomes a faceless statistic of people who drank too much at a bar and were mugged on their way home. And since it was a 'controlled leak' no one knows about it.

It's all true. Reiser tried but failed to open source the model. And that time Jobs looked cancer thin? He had actually just gotten back from a two week stint in Devil's Slough after a botched termination turned into a Most Dangerous Game where the hunter became the hunted.

More like applie

[Tobor the Eighth Man]

It's worth noting that if Apple were a smaller company, this sort of behavior would (or should, you can always find more shills) get doors slammed in its face at media outlets pretty fast. There's two reasons why it doesn't: 1. They're probably well-connected enough that they could always find someone else to leak their supposed "info," either through naievete or just apathy, and 2. They're so big that exclusive Apple news is a big plus, even if it turns out to be false or misleading.

Re:More like applie

[binarylarry]

It's great how much bigger companies do this, here's a transcript I recorded recently:

for(;;) {
Informant Exec: So online mag, this is totally off the record, but we're thinking about cloning something Apple is doing.
Online Mag: O RLY?
Informant Exec: Yeah, it's going to totally fucking kill Apple.
Online Mag: Wow, that sounds amazing, what is is?
Informant Exec: It's kind of like the iPhone only much more innovative
Online Mag: Sounds like it's really going to change the market, any other projects you're working on?
Information Exec: Yeah, we're also talking about cloning some stuff Google is doing.
Online Mag: O RLY?
Informant Exec: Yeah, it's going to totally fucking kill Google.
Online Mag: Wow, that sounds amazing, what is is?
Informant Exec: It's kind of like Google search only much more innovative
Online Mag: Sounds like it's really going to change the market, any other projects you're working on?
}

Stocks?

[retech]

I'd love to see some data about company insiders and their stock purchasing/selling in relation to the "leaks". There are a few people making a shitload of $$$ off of the leaks. And if they are not then I'd be shocked. The last WSJ "leak" shot appl stock way up and my first thought was: someone is having a nice Christmas bonus.

Re:Still waiting...

[armanox]

I'm waiting for the iPhone Shuffle.

I will need some help with this.

[starbugs]

All we need to do is create a leak for a fictional (but desirable) product. Slowly release blurry mock-ups and specs. Start a few rumors here and there. Then (as long as everyone stays positive) we let Apple deal with the actual implementation.

I'm awaiting my DRM-free ireader. (Apple, you can do it so much better)

Re:I will need some help with this.

[peragrin]

That's because apple wants to release good products at launch time. Sure you can use the latest screen technology hut it doubles the cost comes with unstable drivers and if you sneeze at it cracks. Apple sells the whole widget. Having an easily scratched screen material is just as bad as buggy software.

Most people don't realize that hardware and material science is a major part of product design. Bringing a final product to market is about trade offs.
There havebeen touch screens and tablets for years upon years. But until recently the hardware and software haventbeen ready for mass deployments. Just look at Microsoft. Is windows tablet edition a good piece of tablet software? Ithas all the pieces but they haven't been assembled properly yet. The need for convertible tablets is why. Msft is trying to shove a mouse and keyboard based desktop at tablet users. But that isn't how tablet need to work. They need their own UI

just having the ingredents doesn't mean you can bake cake.

Re:I will need some help with this.

[dangitman]

Look at the iPod, it wasn't exactly the largest media player at the time, nor did it have the most specs.

In portable music players, largest is not best. The iPod succeeded because it was the smallest hard-drive based player on the market. As far as specs go, you're wrong. It was the most advanced product on the market. It had Firewire for transferring music, while everybody else had USB 1. It had a nice screen and menu navigation system, while everybody else had clunky controls like a portable CD player, and very limited LCD displays.

Re:I will need some help with this.

[nine-times]

I think you're on to something, but the reasons are a little more complicated than, "they want to release gadgets in generations".

First is the fact that their development method is just different from a lot of other companies. Most companies take an idea an idea like a portable MP3 player and say, "Lets put every feature we can into this thing for launch. I want it to have a radio, and have it play lots of games, and maybe have a built-in toaster oven!" So they make a list of features and put them all into a prototype. They polish the prototype until it kind of works, and then release that design as a product. In its first version, it only kind of works, but has lots of problems from having a lot of not-quite-ready features crammed in. They try to fix these problems in the next version.

In contrast, if Apple sets out to design an mp3 player, then there's a decent chance that the product will only have 1 major feature: playing mp3s. Instead of making the first version have loads of features, they'll spend their development time making sure that using the product as an mp3 player is easy, intuitive, and works very well. They'll add features over the next few versions, but they'll do so relatively slowly because each time, they're making sure the new features are integrated well into the existing design.

Those are two different design philosophies which bring different results. In the first way of doing things, you start with a more feature-rich product, but in the second way you start with a more polished product.

Beyond that, there's something else going on in Apple's marketing that is pretty obvious once you notice it, but a lot of people don't notice it. Most tech manufacturers are constantly trying to introduce new products and drive down the price. When Apple introduces a new product, they tend to keep the price stable for a very long time. Watch iPod prices or Macbook prices, and you'll notice that the price very rarely goes down. As new technology comes out, Apple keeps upgrading the product to be smaller, lighter, or more feature rich in order to justify the current price, but they don't really drop the price.

It's worth understanding that the price points are often chosen by marketing, and then a product is designed to fit that price. I believe the first iPod was $400, and right now that's also the price of the most expensive iPod. There's a reason for this. It's not that Apple couldn't create a really snazzy $700 iPod, but that if they did, Jobs would probably say, "Let's put that on ice until we can make it cheaper." Ultimately, they don't want to release a $700 iPod and then two years later sell the same iPod for $400. Along with everything else, that creates the impression of a product whose value is dropping. They'd much rather sell a crappy $400 iPod this year and then two years later sell you the super-snazzy iPod for $400, so that you have the impression of a product which preserves its value by continually improving.

The reasons

[Sockatume]

For those who don't feel like actually reading the article, here're the specific reasons given for the tablet leaks:

* 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.

I'm especially curious about the first and the third. Who is the competitor? The Google/Alex Reader partnership? The rumoured Chrome OS tablet? And who is the partner, a content provider or an OEM? Were they concerned that there wasn't enough interest in the device to guarantee volume, or was it something else?

Re:The reasons

[yakumo.unr]

There's talk of Microsoft slate tablet kicking about now too : http://www.neowin.net/news/live/10/01/06/microsoft-set-to-unveil-slate-tablet-pc-at-ces

How anyone orchestrates leaks

[snowwrestler]

I work in politics and government and to give Apple much credit for this is sort of laughable. Let's just say that if they tried to patent it, there would be plenty of prior art.

Some people will look at this and think "that's why Apple is so successful at building buzz." It's only partly true. Every company leaks, but not every company gets a NY Times story and 100 blog echoes. The leaks work so well because Apple is a hot, popular company. They don't, by themselves, make Apple a hot, popular company.

Re:How anyone orchestrates leaks

[Archangel Michael]

The leaks work so well because Apple is a hot, popular company. They don't, by themselves, make Apple a hot, popular company.

Actually, I think it is a chicken/egg issue. At this point, the kind of leaking that happens is partly responsible for building the chic, hot, popular. People generally want to be in the "in crowd", and Part of the whole "leak" mentality is build momentum before a product is released.

The leaks accomplish this "in-crowd" mentality, especially when it is accompanied by pictures of people waiting in line at the local Apple store for days, for the latest coolness a few months later when said coolness is released.

Apple has MASTERED this like no other company. Nobody waits in line for the lastest "Dell" or "HP". Why? Because they aren't "cool", and all of the products they release are in fact part of the YAD (yet another device).

Other companies get this kind of response once, or twice a decade. Apple achieves this on a regular and consistant basis.

Apple is cool, because people think it is. People think it is cool, because on a regular basis, they release things that people want because Apple is cool.

It is cool to be Apple.

Re:Still waiting...

[Xenious]

If they were released during the winter i'd say that is the dance you do to keep warm waiting outside in line to buy one.

It's a swipe to the right
type in that PIN
search for your app (there's one for that)
let the fun begin

It's the iPhone Shuffle

Re:Ethics

[Sockatume]

For any publicly-trade company, acting to benefit the company is actually one of the fundimental ethical principles. If you act in a way that drops the company's stock price you're essentially shredding other people's money. Sneaky but harmless media-baiting to improve a product's chance of success is the right ethical choice in that framework. It's not ethical from the journalistic perspective, of course.

News just in..

[Anonymous Coward]

Bears: Wanton woodland defeacation shock
Pope: Catholic?

Re:Still waiting...

[should_be_linear]

I am waiting for iScored :-(

Re:Still waiting...

[tchdab1]

You mean the phone with one button that dials a random number in your phonebook?

Uncontrolled leaks

[200_success]

Also of interest is how Apple handles unauthorized leaks from its employees. Apparently, they lock down buildings and inspect employees' personal communication devices to hunt down the perpetrator.