While the content of Steve Jobs’ second open letter, on Apple’s green record and future plans, is interesting on its own, his motivation for publishing these missives is equally intriguing. It could be argued that his first post was designed to put pressure on the record companies over DRM —certainly his statement that Apple would abolish DRM ‘in a heartbeat’ put the ball firmly in the court of the big four - and if it was, it worked brilliantly. EMI has already said it will make its entire back catalogue available DRM-free and the other major record companies are expected to follow suit.

By outlining Apple’s current record and plans for the future, Jobs is betting that he can head off a shareholder revolt.

Perhaps it was the success of the first letter that provided the motivation to publish a second, but who was Jobs addressing? Not the media, that’s for sure. Jobs is widely held to have contempt for the technology press, the Mac press in particular, and its unlikely there would be a great deal of interest from the mainstream media, whom Jobs’ holds in marginally higher regard (with the exception of Time and the Wall Street Journal who he seems to have some affection for).

Nor was he aiming it at the lobby groups. Greenpeace and the Computer Takeback Campaign have been on Apple’s back for some time over its environmental record. Even if he cared what they think, it would be easy to argue that Greenpeace’s campaign is distorted and politically motivated - Apple is the highest profile technology company on the planet, so by directing its fire at it, Greenpeace ensures maximum publicity for itself.

Indeed many of the comments in the letter - ‘in one environmental group’s recent scorecard, Dell, HP and Lenovo all scored higher than Apple because of their plans (or “plans for releasing plans” in the case of HP)’, for example - were designed to point out flaws in the Greenpeace analysis.

That was a sideshow however, the real motivation behind the letter was to head off a shareholder revolt at next week’s AGM. That meeting of the company’s shareholders will include two votes on shareholder proposals to improve Apple’s environmental policy. One to set a timetable for the elimination of toxic chemicals in Apple products and the other to stop exporting electronic waste to developing countries. The Apple board is unanimously opposed to both proposals, something which must be an acute embarrassment to board member and environmental campaigner, Al Gore. Jobs’ letter, while not satisfying either of those two proposals, is designed to show shareholders that the company is serious about reducing the harm it causes the environment, even if it disagrees with some of them about the best way to do it.

It’s unlikely that either proposals will receive enough votes to be forced through, but a sizeable rebellion would be an embarrassment to the company at the place it values most: Wall Street. By outlining Apple’s current record and plans for the future, Jobs is betting that he can head off a shareholder revolt. And by appearing to be almost contrite in his admission that the company had failed to communicate properly with regard to environmental issues and at the same time making a promise to provide regular updates, he’s playing a very clever hand.

Greenpeace, predictably, is unimpressed. ‘While customers in the US will be able to return their Apple products for recycling knowing that their gear won’t end up in the e-waste mountains of Asia and India, Apple isn’t making that promise to anyone but customers in the USA,’ it said in a statement.

Popularity: 9% [?]

Thanks for visiting Random Inactivity. If you're new here, why not take some time to look around and please subscribe to my RSS feed