????史蒂夫?喬布斯是個營銷天才，但在公開披露信息這方面他就不那么出色了。他一貫以專制統(tǒng)治、嚴格保密和傲慢自大而著稱于世。眾所周知，蘋果一度始終拒絕披露其創(chuàng)始人的健康狀況細節(jié)，哪怕這家公司的命運和股價明明就和這位前首席執(zhí)行官的個人健康息息相關。

????所以，在2011年8月，當更和藹可親、也不那么咄咄逼人的庫克先生走馬上任成為蘋果掌門人時，蘋果的評論家們普遍樂觀地預計，蘋果會變得更善于溝通，更容易接近，也更深諳公關之道。

????可是，在庫克先生治下，蘋果的公關水平不僅每況愈下，連一貫擅長的營銷手法也失去感覺了。這種情況是如此之糟，以至于當蘋果股價從巔峰水平跌去了33%后，投資者又開始紛紛要求庫克下臺。那么，一頭霧水的庫克先生到底該怎么做才能避免臨了只能揣著3.78億美元的安慰獎、最終還是被掃地出門的尷尬下場呢？

????先試試下面這些辦法如何：

????認真對待自己的“形象”。

????從各方面看，史蒂夫?喬布斯都是這個地球上最桀驁不馴、傲慢自大的人之一。他對競爭對手伺機報復，對員工口出惡言，而據(jù)蘋果首席設計師稱，他居然還不洗澡！

????不過喬布斯也是個杰出人物，所以他并不怎么在乎和媒體合作，比如他就認為，蘋果會管好自己的形象。而很大程度上事實都證明了他的英明。

????可是庫克先生就不同了，盡管謝天謝地他不像喬布斯那么狂妄自大，但卻也不具備籠罩著喬布斯、充當其保護傘的那層“才華橫溢”的光環(huán)。最近，他甚至必須為了證明自己的“稱職”而度日如年。提前發(fā)布還未成熟的“蘋果地圖”，以及為其在中國的售后服務而道歉都充分表明，蘋果在庫克帶領下已經(jīng)失去了方向感。

????所以庫克不能像喬布斯那樣對輿論置若罔聞，他得關注市場上對蘋果的各種說法，還應該努力去“影響”這些輿論，這樣投資者和其他人才不會對蘋果最終發(fā)布的言論感到泄氣或失望。

????單就上周二這個發(fā)布會而言，當整個市場都翹首盼望突破性產(chǎn)品及與中國移動簽下大單時，它卻變成蘋果高管在臺上的一通自我吹噓。這讓大家立刻得出結論：真是小題大做。

????那些在乎自己公眾形象的聰明公司從來就不會讓股票分析師或記者抱有什么不切實際的期望。但蘋果好像對此毫不在意。

????但它應該在乎。

????改善與媒體的關系。

????史蒂夫?喬布斯很少會安排接受媒體圈小角色的訪問，蒂姆?庫克似乎也和他一樣對媒體不以為然，所以很少能看到庫克在媒體上拋頭露面。

????與此同時，蘋果的那些死對頭們——從到處兜生意的對沖基金經(jīng)理到言之鑿鑿的分析師——可以隨心所欲地隨時抨擊蘋果。由于蘋果對此從不還擊——電視主持人也很少還嘴——結果就沒人挑戰(zhàn)這些對頭們武斷的說法，上周二這場自殺式的產(chǎn)品發(fā)布會就是如此。

????公關界的格言是：“沉默就等于默認”（Silence grants the point），而蘋果這樣一直保持沉默就是表明，公司面對這些非議沒有說法。

????Steve Jobs was a marketing genius but less good when it came to public disclosure. Jobs was well known for his dictatorial control, secretiveness, and arrogance. Apple famously refused to share any details of the founder's health, even though the company's fortunes and stock price were materially linked to the CEO's personal well-being.

????So Apple observers were optimistic when the more affable/less intimidating Mr. Cook replaced his late predecessor in August 2011 that Apple would become a more communicative, more accessible, more public relations-savvy company.

????Not only has Apple's public relations gotten worse under Mr. Cook, it's also starting to lose its marketing touch; so much so that with Apple's stock back down 33% from its peak, investors are once again calling for the CEO's scalp.

????What can the confused Cook do to prevent the ignominy of getting canned and having to slink away with nothing but his $378 million compensation package as comfort?

????How 'bout these for starters:

????Take your "image" seriously.

????By all reports, Steve Jobs was one of the most arrogant human beings ever to grace the planet. He was vindictive to competitors, abusive to his employees, and, according to Apple's chief designer, didn't bathe!

????But Jobs was also brilliant, so he didn't much care about cooperating with the media, for example; Apple's image, he felt, would take care of itself. And largely he was right.

????Tim Cook, on the other hand, while thankfully not as arrogant as Jobs, doesn't possess the aura of "brilliance" that protected his predecessor. He's had a tough time recently proving he's even "competent." The premature release of not ready-for-prime time Apple Maps and the company's apology for customer service in China exemplify how Apple has appeared to waver on Cook's watch.

????So Cook, unlike Jobs, has to pay attention to what's being said about Apple in the market, and he should work to "influence" the conversation, so that investors and others aren't frustrated or disappointed in what Apple ultimately says.

????On Tuesday, when the market expected product breakthroughs and a contract with China Mobile, it got, instead, a lot of on-stage whoop-de-doing from Apple executives. Immediate verdict: Much ado about nothing.

????Smart companies, concerned about their public image, never let securities analysts or journalists get too far afield from realistic expectations. Apple doesn't seem to care.

????It should.

????Meet the media.

????Steve Jobs rarely deigned to be interviewed by hoi polloi in the media, and Tim Cook appears to share that disdain. So Cook media sightings are few and far between.

????Meanwhile, Apple's adversaries -- from self-promoting hedge fund managers to finally vindicated analysts -- are given free rein to bash Apple any time they want. With no resistance from the company -- and little pushback from TV anchors -- Apple enemies pontificate unchallenged, as was the case after Tuesday's suicidal product launch.

????The public relations axiom is that, "Silence grants the point;" and Apple's silence, accordingly, suggests the firm has no answer for its critics.