Inside Apple's PR Practices, From Media Control to Attitude Shift Under Tim Cook

[IJ Reilly]

I'm not certain Apple's techniques are unique though. Attentive and borderline manipulative, sure. But not unique.

Ferrari for example. Any press event where their cars are being driven by journalists requires a Ferrari engineer onsite to "calibrate" and monitor the operation of the vehicle before journalists drive it. That's manipulation in favor of a desired PR outcome.

I don't know that a case was necessarily being made for uniqueness, but it is certainly true that Apple is what it is today on account of one highly controlling individual. I am still trying to figure out why some feel that this description of how Apple PR does business is somehow surprising or out of character.

 

[Keirasplace]

During the "Antennagate" scandal, it occurred to me how the sudden attack, the prepared charges, the attempted definition of a non-problem into a problem, had all the hallmarks of the kind of PR operation that is business as usual in many industries-- and in our politics. Whatever you think about Bergdahl, you should know that it exploded within hours after the release because it was a prepared PR strategy by the former aide to John Bolton.

And no, PR is not news. It's pretty lying. Attempted manipulation of opinion. Within bounds, it's cool. That "Here's to the Crazy Ones" is pretty effective, isn't it? If there was a company, what would you want it to be?

At least the tip to the tech reporter was just, "Hey, look at this." If it happened, print it if you want to.

PR has existed before it was called PR. Feeding info to the vine is a well worn path throughout history. Before the modern medias, you actually used trusted people to do so in person! Still a useful way to reach people these days; though rarely done in person.

Its influence these days is much bigger than it ever has been, because most news organisation have cut their staff, especially experienced editorial staff, to the bone.

Knowledgeable editorial staff in the fields they are reporting on and the standards they uphold is what makes the New York Times different from the quasi blog some former news organisations publish these days.

In smaller organisation, barely massaged PR released are often republished. If you can get AP, Reuters to distribute your PR release (even in massaged form), you are golden. Technology and science info on the wires often are very often PR releases. Those releases then get almost to local newscasts local as interesting fillers.

 

[Tsuchiya]

Well, that was certainly an interesting read while I had my breakfast this morning 😛

Nothing in there really surprises me, though it is a bit disquieting having it confirmed that Apple likes to discredit those who won't toe the line.

I wonder what caused 9to5 to publish? Or what the retribution would be? 😱😱😱

 

[the8thark]

I thought Apple employees were banned from being on rumour sites like this one?

We are.

So you're either not an Apple Employee or you're breaking the rules.
Or just being sarcastic.

Not sure which.

 

[blacksurfer]

Let's talk about product placements. Apple has done a great job placing macs and iPhones in popular shows such as True Blood and movies "into the Storm" and others.

 

[roadbloc]

Just like any other company then.

 

[Mackan]

I take it this is the last time 9to5 mac gets one of these emails.

Hehehe.

 

[blahblah100]

I was just going to say that the vast majority of this is standard practice.

Except when Samsung does it... 🙄

 

[fr33 loader]

Image

If it wasn't clear i thought that was very petty - Apple PR suggesting "news" articles that diss the competitor. The pressure must be immense for them to pull this level on unclassy.

So where are the people bashing Samsung for their mud slinging tactics on their ads. Everybody does it. Apple keeps their hands clean using fanboy "news writers/bloggers" to keep their image clean is of no surprise to me. Difference is, Apple shills are paid with early hands-on of new Apple products as well as possible tidbits of leaks from corporate Apple while Samsung shills are paid with HotPockets. Hypocrites has taken a vacation on this thread.

 

[SurfaceAndIPad]

So where are the people bashing Samsung for their mud slinging tactics on their ads. Everybody does it. Apple keeps their hands clean using fanboy "news writers/bloggers" to keep their image clean is of no surprise to me. Difference is, Apple shills are paid with early hands-on of new Apple products as well as possible tidbits of leaks from corporate Apple while Samsung shills are paid with HotPockets. Hypocrites has taken a vacation on this thread.

Samsung ads are one thing because you know it's a Samsung ad... I would place Apple's tactic of shutting out anybody other than a pro-apple outlets from the first run of product reviews as far less "kosher" as far as marketing practices go. Remember, these outlets do not often proclaim to be "fanboys", and someone that happens across their review assumes that they are unbiased. More or less propaganda in my book.

I mean, think of Samsung and Apple as political candidates - which tactic is more underhanded? Attack ads or outright propaganda?

 

[balmeo]

I wonder what caused 9to5 to publish? Or what the retribution would be? 😱😱😱

Gurman doesn't get invitations to Apple events, and this is his way to let off steam.

 

[tsadi]

What a bunch of amateurs. They should look at Samsung who fly bloggers to Germany, and if they refuse to promote Samsung, man their booths, wear Samsung uniform, they lose their return flight home.

http://www.cnet.com/news/samsung-to-bloggers-promote-our-products-at-ifa-or-walk-home/

 

[RnSK]

I mean, think of Samsung and Apple as political candidates - which tactic is more underhanded? Attack ads or outright propaganda?

Attack ads *are* outright propaganda 🙂

 

[parapup]

Attack ads *are* outright propaganda 🙂

Nope. People are starkly aware it's an ad and they even list the sponsors. Reviewers getting preferential treatment don't disclose it and most public assumes they are unbiased/ free of influence. Big difference.