Talking to the press is dangerous – you run a real risk of being taken out of context, and you run the risk of an in context comment having more impact than you expected. Not because the press is evil, but because reporters have different aims and contexts than you do.

I recall some years back when an Apple engineer made an intemperate comment on java-dev, which made it to Mac the Knife. Said engineer felt the comment was taken out of context, and the response was excessive. No way to respond, though, to ‘Apple engineer says testing of the Thingie Feature bites!”, as Mac the Knife was not interested in another discussion.

For that matter, we lost a very good client once when one of our partners made a conjecture about the overall future of the web services business, which our client took as a revelation of their next quarter financial outlook. They never worked with us again, even though we really did not mean to even imply anything about that client’s financial status.

Further, you never know what story is in someone’s head. True of all people, but reporters write those stories down. That is their job. Something innocent like ‘I found out about the Intel transition when everyone else did’ could be spun up one side and down the other according to someone’s existing biases. A minor comment, but one that could get high level attention, even if it is not the purpose of the interview.

So, the risk for Buzz is high. I do not blame him for wanting at least a bit of protection – something like a notice of intent that his manager has seen and approved. Even if it then does spin out of control, he will have some support, most like.

Scott

Because Buzz, as a developer, would be talking about Mac OS X, that would violate one of the policies Apple does have, and that’s “talking to the press.” Basically, you cannot talk to the press about anything. This is particularly true of retail employees (who are strictly told to refer any and all questions from any member of the press to the PR department).

While it’s true that people don’t always get caught – or even fired – for “talking to the press,” Apple would have every right to terminate Buzz for doing so if they so wished. Right or wrong, that’s their policy. Disregarding that policy, even if you feel the the spirit of the policy should allow for indie comments on shows like CocoaRadio, shows a disregard for your own employment. Again, right or wrong, good or bad…

Mark,
Thanks for your advice. You’re absolutely right about the not crossing streams part. That’s what I was trying to get away with here, but it turns out a lot more people read my weblog these days than I thought.

I suppose if I worked for Apple and wanted to release stuff without the grief, I’d go down to the county clerk and pay the $10 for a company name, and write and/or sell software under that name… It may not give you ‘name recognition’ as an individual, but hey, you can’t have everything. You don’t need to spend the grand on the LLC unless you are in a services industry (then you need indemnification agreements etc). A proper EULA disclaimer that if your s/w impregnates your cat or causes your skin to peel off, it’s not your bag should be enough.

The key to working with an oppressive (pardon, secretive :)) organization is to not cross the streams. What they don’t know won’t hurt them — so long as you truly are not willfully breaking NDA or competing then anything they find out afterwords (if at all) is less of a big deal then foreplay. Many companies other then Apple are quite risk aversive. They are more afraid of what you MIGHT say and not as worried about what you said after the fact once they discovered you did nothing wrong. They might say tell us first if you do this again… but at least it wouldn’t be over before it started and you’ll have gotten your fill. The fact this is pretty much an impromptu interview that is not scripted, Public Relations and Apple Legal have NO idea what you might say. It’s different when presenting at a venue (albeit a pain in the ass).

A good thing to take, especially if you speak at conference venues, is media training. Teaches you how to answer interview questions such as not to fall victim to the dreaded “sound-byte” phenomenon. Some of it is common sense, but some reporters are looking for a story they have already written in their head and are angling their questions such that you bumble down the path… others are just ignorant to technology — those you should get a proof of before anything is released. But I digress.

Hope any of this info is helpful.

Good luck to you Buzz – I was really looking forward to hearing the show as I am a steady reader of your weblog, but it’s best not to get the employer excited — We understand.

Buzz: having you here “in the flesh” makes me a little embarrassed about the provocative tone of my statements. I am especially regretful of the implication that your choice is “ridiculous.” That’s clearly a simplistic summation. I think a lot of that is just misplaced anger towards whatever forces caused you to make this decision. I’ll look forward to reading more about your rationale later on.

Justin: I definitely appreciate the “silent to the point of annoyance” factor of corporate secrecy. In my time at Apple I was always very mum about unreleased products. Once they’re out the door, though: let’s spread the word! Apple’s own employees are some of their best viral advertisers. In this case, though, I’m just having a lot of trouble accepting the idea that an audio interview is somehow different from a blog entry, or forum posting, or newsgroup article. It’s all “that person from Apple” getting their opinions heard.

[Late addition - haha! I can edit comments ... yeah Justin that is a funny, and very geeky way of putting it :) ]

[appleEmployee silencedBy:self];

Im a geek.

Me: “Wow the new iMac is neat.”
Apple Employee: “No Comment.”

It’s somewhat annoying.