We live in a conspiracist society, any secret plan you can imagine has "been suspected", and generally people require no particular evidence other than "it would make sense to me" (as if there aren't plenty of things that would make sense to me that haven't happened!)
But if Apple actually wanted media outlets to cover it, having law enforcement seize and search the property of the editor that broke the story, and then banning the media outlet that broke it from WWDC... doesn't seem like the way to encourage anyone to cover it next time there's a leak, if you're actually hoping for coverage of secretly orchestrated leaks. https://www.pcmag.com/archive/gizmodo-banned-from-wwdc-25149...
Does Apple do controlled leaks? Of course, any company which is able to keep secrets in the first place does.
For the iPhone 4? Absolutely not, the only other model which changed iPhone as much as the 4 was the X, Steve was still alive for the 4 and there is absolutely no way he would have approved just leaving it in a bar for hype.
Steve Jobs wanted to be the person who showed that to the world. Remember the first MacBook Air? Steve lived for that moment.
But if Apple actually wanted media outlets to cover it, having law enforcement seize and search the property of the editor that broke the story, and then banning the media outlet that broke it from WWDC... doesn't seem like the way to encourage anyone to cover it next time there's a leak, if you're actually hoping for coverage of secretly orchestrated leaks. https://www.pcmag.com/archive/gizmodo-banned-from-wwdc-25149...