Every September, social media begins to spread the newest Apple product. Despite plastering its logo onto the same iPhone as previous years with only slight modifications, advertisements enthusiastically convince you it is an absolute must-have.
With social media being more popular and influential than ever, it comes as no surprise that the buzz of the new iPhone has been heard across the GSU halls just as much as it has on influencer’s feeds. Add the ever-growing pressure to conform to a hyper-consumerist society, whose insatiable hunger for the ‘next best thing’ will never be filled, and you have the perfect recipe to feed millions of people who are easily influenced to feel compelled to buy the latest iPhone.
There are a multitude of reasons why you should not buy the newest iPhone, and these reasons range from things as well-known and widely recognized as the typical “don’t-buy-it-just-because-it’s-new” reasoning to the less commonly known “don’t-buy-it-because-Apple-contributes-to-violating-human-rights-violations” rationale.
Apple has been dominating the market for years now, particularly in the United States – so much so, that it is not uncommon to hear people taunting those who use other products such as Androids or Samsungs. Apple’s advertising has done a phenomenal job convincing its users to continue needlessly consuming more of its products every year – but it has done an even better job at hiding its murky supply chains.
More and more people have begun to question where exactly Apple is getting its products from, and when the supply chain is followed, a suspicious record of ethically concerning questions appears. Earlier this year, the Democratic Republic of Congo warned Apple with a letter threatening a potential lawsuit if their actions – which include purchasing illegally exploited blood minerals from their country – continue.
The DRC’s government has told Apple that they are particularly concerned over the ways that its supply chain has been linked to conflict minerals being smuggled from their country and into Rwanda, where they find their way into Apple’s distribution network.
What raises even more concern is how the region from which these blood minerals are extracted is known to be operated by “armed rebel groups… some of whom have been accused of carrying out mass killings of civilians”, along with other “grave violations of human rights” that are worsening with each passing day.
These allegations should not be taken lightly by Apple product users. Instead of focusing on the shiny, ever-so-slightly modified new version of the iPhone, Apple users should begin to recognize the true cost of this unnecessary purchase. For people living in a first-world country, it can be easy to ignore what is happening on the other side of the world, but spreading awareness on this issue can help educate those who are unaware of the controversy the tech company is dealing with. The more people become aware of these serious allegations, the less needless products will be bought. In turn, this will help cut down the continuation of a supply chain that is being blamed for horrific human rights violations.
While choosing ethics over material-driven consumption may not be the best financial decision for some influencers, it needs to happen for a variety of reasons. Not buying into these yearly overconsumption marketing strategies will let giant companies like Apple know that if they want to continue being successful, they need to find more ethical ways to produce their products. This will help push for innovation that does not need to come at the cost of human lives.
