Why does the WSJ's Yukari Iwatani Kane get the planned Apple leaks?

Seth Weintraub
|
January 06, 2010
|
Share

Why has Apple picked her to be the source of planned leaks? John "clear skies" Martellaro tells of his time at Apple where he was instructed to do planned leaks and the purpose of such leaks: 

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.

He points out that two authors at the WSJ are always named so they can point the finger at each other.  But if you look at recent likely leaked stories, one name keeps coming up 100% of the time:  Yukari Iwatani Kane.  Why? 

Video of her discussing her Apple leaks below.

Here's Kane discussing her Apple leaks with the WSJ:

The other recent examples of planned Apple leaks were to Businessweek last year about Verizon getting the iPhone and tablet when Apple was renegotiating its contract with AT&T.

Comments (17)

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 5:17pm

Well, it ain't cause she's hot...  Just saying...

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 6:37pm

Wow what a terrible thing to say..

sinouber (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 3:00am

yeah that was pretty bad... you could have at least said because shes ethnic and they take the fall well...

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 1:06pm

What are you, 12-years-old or something ...?

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 5:23pm

All that hype and speculation makes for some real cheap advertising. 

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 5:26pm

$ 1000 for a big iPod touch? Seriously, text book publishers interested in developing for thousand dollar device for students so they can highlight?!?! If it was priced close to e-readers then probably but with that money you can get yourself a real laptop

9to5Mac Bitter Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 6:05pm

it's a pretty bad journalist that gives a corporation free advertising, i think this doesn't look too good on apple or the WSJ

PeterToo (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 12:50am

You're missing the point. Apple news is good news. People listen up when you have them. Any journalist will tell you that an exclusive, even with all these if's and maybe's, is a good story. She'd be a bad journalist if she didn't go with it.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 6:21pm

It makes Apple look hella smart. Microsoft pays outside companies to come in and organize focus groups, and mid-management camps for them. They agonize over advertising... Apple just lets rumor sites and journalists do the dirty work for them and they put the savings into their product development. 

Reggi (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 6:28pm

Why does she get the pre-PR or controlled PR leaks?

1. She probably owns AAPL stock, and Apple knows this. This makes her a prime target to speak well of the company.

2. She knows someone. In this industry, knowing someone is key, and someone that knows her, knows she is trustworthy.

3. It's the WSJ, and there is no other publication around anymore, as respected as they, they are just solid reporters. That said, using them is a key to credible leaking, thus Apple can control what is talked about - their leaks to the WSJ.

4. Leak after leak she has said the right things, and Apple rewards her with more. Should she screw up a leak, she's done and onto someone else.

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 06, 2010 - 10:06pm

I remember Apple insisting that Jobs' absence was due to a cold.

sinouber (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 3:10am

WALT is too high profile to have a rumor be wrong

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 5:46am

The Journal is a newspaper with high editorial standards (I don't like the politics of the opinion pages, but the news reporting is very high quality).

If you go to the WSJ website, you will see that Ms Kane is the reporter responsible for covering Apple. Walt Mosberg is the personal technology guru, not a regular news beat reporter who can turn around a story in a couple of hours.  In other words, she is the natural reporter to be covering stories of this type. As for having two or more reporters in the byline, that is usually where different beats overlap. For instance,  the Jan 5 story with Mr Fowler makes sense as he covers e-readers for the journal (as well as Amazon).

Is Apple taking advantage of the journalist? Hardly, they just do it better than most. This mutually beneficial relationship between company and reporter is nothing new, and forms the basis of most news reporting, including political reporting. It may come as a complete shock to those who are more familiar with the standards of the blogosphere, where only opinions matter and the use of sources can only mean that it must be a corporate conspiracy. 

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 5:47am

The Journal is a newspaper with high editorial standards (I don't like the politics of the opinion pages, but the news reporting is very high quality).

If you go to the WSJ website, you will see that Ms Kane is the reporter responsible for covering Apple. Walt Mosberg is the personal technology guru, not a regular news beat reporter who can turn around a story in a couple of hours.  In other words, she is the natural reporter to be covering stories of this type. As for having two or more reporters in the byline, that is usually where different beats overlap. For instance,  the Jan 5 story with Mr Fowler makes sense as he covers e-readers for the journal (as well as Amazon).

Is Apple taking advantage of the journalist? Hardly, they just do it better than most. This mutually beneficial relationship between company and reporter is nothing new, and forms the basis of most news reporting, including political reporting. It may come as a complete shock to those who are more familiar with the standards of the blogosphere, where only opinions matter and the use of sources can only mean that it must be a corporate conspiracy. 

Gazoobee (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 1:04pm

I find this whole article and half of the comments offensive.  

When people use language like this ("why her?" etc.), and don't provide any *reasons* behind their queries it just shows that what they *really* want to say is that you don't feel she is "worthy" or whatever.  

If the author said, "Why her when [insert name] is a more obvious choice" that's one thing.  To leave it dangling like that is to turn it into the obvious insult that it is.  

 

I watched the video to see if I could spot the objection and knew beforehand that it would turn out that she is:

- gay

- ugly

- fat

- all of the above. 

and wasn't disappointed in my prediction.  

Sadly, her "ugliness" is due to a skin condition that isn't her fault, making the offensive article even *more* offensive than it already is.  

 

Hang your heads in shame you idiotic losers.  

TheGhost (not verified) | January 07, 2010 - 2:17pm

It's obvious from the video that she loves Apple because she's been burned by Microsoft products!

9to5Mac Noob (not verified) | January 08, 2010 - 7:12am

It´s said, that in journalism sometimes journalist cover companies for a longer period. Might be a rumour, however, it sometimes saves newspaper readers from reading the immature babbling of blogger without qualification ...