When the side buttons on my three-year-old iPhone stopped working, it seemed like a minor inconvenience. However, I soon realized these tiny buttons controlled crucial features like Apple Pay and Apple Wallet, rendering my expensive device nearly useless. Like millions before me, I visited the Apple Store, hoping for a quick fix from one of their ‘Genius’ staff members.
The diagnosis was a repair cost of approximately $700—half the price of a new phone and nearly the same amount I paid for the device three years ago. After spending over an hour at the store, I decided to endure the malfunction for a few weeks. Eventually, I returned to swap my phone, and an Apple employee assisted in transferring my data to a new device. Strangely, once the data transfer was complete, my old phone’s buttons began working perfectly again. This incident left me questioning whether my iPhone was genuinely broken or simply feigning issues to prompt a new purchase.
Apple’s Business Model: A Cycle of Upgrades
The experience highlighted a broader issue with Apple’s business model, which relies heavily on a cycle of new phones, upgrades, and replacements. The cheapest iPhones start at $1,200, more than a week’s wages for many Australians. Yet, consumers are told they are ‘lucky’ if their phone lasts beyond three or four years. One Apple employee even remarked that my iPhone 11’s three-year lifespan was typical.
Apple’s commitment to environmental sustainability is often touted, with the company emphasizing its use of recycled materials, clean energy, and lower-carbon shipping. However, the reality appears less noble. Despite its green marketing, Apple continues to drive millions into an endless cycle of upgrades, each new phone contributing to the e-scrapheap.
The Human and Environmental Cost of Technology
Each iPhone contains rare earth metals and cobalt, much of which is mined under harsh conditions. In the Democratic Republic of Congo, children as young as seven dig through toxic mud to mine cobalt for batteries, earning only a few dollars a day. In China, factories assembling these phones have faced allegations of driving workers into grueling 12-hour shifts and overcrowded dormitories. Rivers run black with industrial waste, a stark contrast to Apple’s polished image.
“In the late 2000s and early 2010s, a series of worker suicides occurred at Foxconn factories in China, one of Apple’s largest suppliers. In response, Foxconn installed safety nets outside dormitories and factory buildings to prevent employees from jumping.”
As I paid for my new phone, I couldn’t help but think about the seven-year-olds in the Congo, digging cobalt out of toxic mud so I could tap for coffee with Apple Pay. Each phone is packed with hazardous materials like lead, cadmium, mercury, and lithium, which leach into soil and groundwater when disposed of improperly.
Consumerism and Corporate Responsibility
My grandparents’ generation valued repair and longevity, but for millennials, that knowledge has been lost. Corporations have trained us to upgrade and discard, viewing repair as futile. The allure of a new iPhone with a slightly better camera and more battery life is hard to resist, yet it perpetuates a cycle of waste.
Even within the Apple Store, the company’s policies raise questions. While waiting for my phone’s diagnosis, I asked an employee if they were allowed to have water on the shop floor. The answer was no—not even a sip. This policy seems to reflect a lack of trust in employees, tasked with fixing expensive gadgets yet unable to drink water publicly.
“Apple’s seminal slogan ‘think different’ helped resurrect the company in 1997. If ever there was a reason to ‘think different,’ it is Apple’s chain of sterile, water-free temples of consumerism.”
This issue isn’t exclusive to Apple; it extends to every major tech company and consumers like myself. The question remains: how do we address this cycle of consumption and waste?
Looking Forward: Solutions and Accountability
As consumers, we must demand more from tech companies, pushing for products designed with longevity and repairability in mind. Legislative measures could enforce stricter recycling and e-waste management standards, holding corporations accountable for their environmental impact.
Moreover, consumers can make informed choices, supporting companies that prioritize ethical sourcing and labor practices. By valuing repair and sustainability, we can shift the paradigm from disposability to durability.
Ultimately, the responsibility lies with both corporations and consumers to foster a more sustainable future. As we navigate this digital age, let us remember the human and environmental costs behind our devices and strive for a balance between innovation and responsibility.
