Apple: Learning to Live with Schizophrenia

Today's announcement that Nick Ciarelli had shuttered his Think Secret website seemed to recall ancient history, given that the suit was filed over predictions Ciarelli made back in December of 2004.

But in Jack Flack's mind, it's just one more instance that begs the question -- How long can Apple maintain its groovy image with the broader public while consistently engaging the media with a control-orientation that would make the flacks at Halliburton blush?

Apple went after Ciarelli because it felt he illegally disclosed trade secrets that would aid the company's competitors. But the close proximity of the company's formal unveiling prompted most tech observers to assume the suit had two motivations.

1. Maintain Apple's ability to fully orchestrate its new-product introductions, which have all the spontaneity of a Celine Dion show, and just as many delirious fans packed in the seats.

2. Chill future internal leaks by scaring Apple employees.

Apple's zealots defend the move as simply a really great company trying to protect some really amazing secrets that all those other really crummy companies really, really wanted. And the suit focused a lot of attention on the issue of whether bloggers deserved the same free-speech protection that traditional media enjoy, a notion that was far more tenuous three years ago. From today's coverage, (Fortune's Philip Elmer-DeWitt offers the best legal summary.)

But from a spin perspective, the legal attack was unnecessarily draconian. As Sam Gustin points out, Ciarelli's site was generally considered to be a hugely positive factor in Apple's ability to generate buzz. Also, Jack Flack assumes that Ciarelli was not an aberration, but instead simply an early example of a growing species that is already radically changing the business news ecological system.

So what about the original question? Just how long can Apple lead two seemingly incompatible lives before it catches up with them?

Probably a very long time. The business is rolling, and the boss sells magazine covers better than Bragelina.

It may seem ironic that a company best-known for innovation and progressive design is also one of the most obvious defenders of the fortress school of PR. But in reality, it's Apple's success in the marketplace that has enabled it to engage the media in the tyrannical way that it does. In other words, they (and he) get away with it because they can.

For things to change, a bit of a perfect storm would have to occur, which would require at least two of these three elements.

1. The business slows, and iPhone never takes off, or gets leap-frogged by competitors.

2. Apple fails to nail the next big thing after iPod finally bogs down in the incremental-improvement swamp.

3. Chairman Steve melts down on a video that finds its way on to YouTube.

But Apple critics should not hold their breath. There are even odds on the first two elements, but only 4-to-1 on the third.