Market Features

Return to Article

'Off-the-Record' Is Not Confirmation

Marek Fuchs

Just don't think you got an assurance when you didn't.

The strange turn in the peculiar health saga of the Apple CEO came Saturday, in a Joe Nocera column in The New York Times. Here's the background: though the medical history and open questions concerning public disclosure are close to common knowledge, Jobs disclosed the fact that he had pancreatic cancer four years ago, a condition discovered a year earlier.

His form of cancer appeared to be treatable and it seemed a non-issue until Jobs' appearance at the Worldwide Developers Conference several weeks back. When the media reported on Jobs' obvious weight loss, Apple dismissed any concern, saying he had a "common bug" but other than that his health was a "private matter." Considering the history of obfuscation and the fact that Jobs is CEO of a public company with no parallel of heir apparent, not all believed or agreed.

Before the publication of Nocera's column, last week brought one other high-profile article that quoted sources close to Jobs as saying he actually had a surgical procedure to correct a digestion problem (so much for that common bug, rarely known to give sufferers a near emaciated look anyway).

Rather than clearing up the confusion and concern on its post-earnings conference call, Apple again retreated into its "private matter" mode, adding tritely that Jobs loves Apple and has no plans to leave.

Which bring us to Nocera and his peculiar interpretation of the rules of engagement in journalism. While working on an article on the issue and after receiving the boilerplate claims from Apple flacks about privacy, Nocera received something else -- a call from Jobs himself.

The two agreed on an off-the-record interview. In journalism, this means what it sounds like -- the conversation is off the record. And that's where things got weird.

Right after the words "I agreed," in reference to the off-the-record nature of the conversation, Nocera proceeded to write all but what the conversation was not about:

"Because the conversation was off the record, I cannot disclose what Mr. Jobs told me. Suffice it to say that I didn't hear anything that contradicted the reporting that John Markoff and I did this week. While his health problems amounted to a good deal more than `a common bug,' they weren't life-threatening and he doesn't have a recurrence of cancer."

Apparently, since Jobs told him that his condition fell somewhere between two truths -- cancer and the common bug, Nocera took it to mean Jobs was handing him a scoop, even though Jobs had spoken only on the condition that the conversation be off the record. Read this line of gross self-justification:

"After he hung up the phone, it occurred to me that I had just been handed, by Mr. Jobs himself, the very information he was refusing to share with the shareholders who have entrusted him with their money."

And this one, which plays falsely modest and does not recognize the notion that someone can address shareholders through the media ... though Jobs did not intend to, despite Nocera's end run around widely recognized rules of engagement:

"You would think he'd want them to know before me. But apparently not."

Savvy investors, this article had a load of problems --- not the least of which was the fact that in its conclusions, it spent time justifying the disclosure of an off-the-record conversation, but not even touching upon the prospect that Jobs might be cleverly spinning, as he did before.

All of the subtleties were lost on the business media (which should know better) in ensuing reports. They simply ran with the straightforward news that Jobs was definitely cancer-free. Look at this headline from Reuters: "Apple CEO Jobs' life not in danger: report."

And the lead, which echoed the point without touching upon any of the strange caveats involved:

"Apple Inc CEO Steve Jobs, who has been dogged by investor concerns about his health, does not have recurrent cancer or a life-threatening health issue, The New York Times reported on Saturday."

Look, let's everyone hope Steve Jobs is fine. But listen to The Business Press Maven here. When an article about his health is so flawed, a savvy investor is best served by not letting it be the final word.