3 ms·

Apple and Facebook are vastly different companies with different incentives and business models. The former is about selling a very particular vision on the per

Apple and Facebook are vastly different companies with different incentives and business models. The former is about selling a very particular vision on the personal computing experience and controlling the platform that underpins that experience. The latter is about selling adverting space, business intelligence and access to large audiences. To both of them, privacy is a liability or a business opportunity. They will engage with the issue of privacy to the extent that it fits within their business models. As far as Apple is concerned, Facebook's stance regarding privacy today isn't a straightforward legal liability or even a moral quandry. It has become a deep strategic liability. Over the past 15 years Facebook and others could freely leverage the affordances provided by Apple's platform - the app store, browser, API's, devices,... - to develop an environment that enables them to track its users. The endless string of deep issues caused by social media have rubbed off and put the entire industry - "Big Tech" including Apple - under public scrutiny. Apple's relationship to Facebook isn't as straightforward as one might think: it's implicitly symbiotic. Audiences want to be able to connect with others via social media. And Apple is perfectly positioned as a middle man to provide an integrated platform - devices, OS, app store,... - to do just that. Being able to access your social network is a major selling point for Apple. Not having to build the infrastructure itself and letting others do it, was a massive opportunity for Apple. At least in so far that those actors didn't enter Apple's own markets. And so, Apple's changing stance is born out of necessity. It's about safeguarding the brand and the vision that it wants to sell to the world. But it has to do that gingerly since it's products have become part of a digital infrastructure that underpin vast parts of economical and societal activities. Unlike Parler, Apple can't just remove Facebook from it's app store without hurting its own interests. In all of this, I don't think that Facebook "admitted it has lost the Battle with Apple over privacy". Let alone that it actually lost that "battle" such as it is. Even more so, if there ever is a battle over privacy, it's between Facebook - and other media companies - and the public as represented by it's legal and judicial institutions. Whether it's through hearings in Congress, or through the dealings with the EU Commission. Apple itself is no stranger to it's products being front and center to privacy issues. It has a long-standing dispute with the FBI about adding backdoors that would allow public authorities to circumvent encryption. [1] However, this is less of a strategic issue threatening it's commercial interests: it's a legal issue in which public authorities - not a private actor - demand legal compliance from Apple. Which is a very different ballgame. In the eyes of the general public, all of this may seem to revolve around the same set of issues. And Apple might be perceived as the "good guy" taking the private interests of its customers to heart as globally trust in big technology corporations has been damaged. But I think that's just too simple and naive a narrative. The reality is usually far more murky. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_dispute https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FBI%E2%80%93Apple_encryption_d...

2cb 6y ago
This is a very interesting post. And you're of course correct, Apple wouldn't take a pro-privacy stance if it was bad for business. They're able to do so because their business model relies primarily on hardware sales. Your points about Apple's position in the marketplace making it a part of consumer infrastructure, and the argument that Apple above all else wants to disassociate itself from the flack the rest of the tech industry as a whole is getting are also extremely valid. However, even if Apple's incentives are based entirely on self-interest (it's a corporation, so this is not exactly a groundbreaking revelation) that doesn't mean the end result cannot be in the consumer's best interest as well. Just as most people here would agree Facebook's business model works against the interests of the consumer, I'd argue Apple's business model is more in line with the best interests of the consumer even if Apple's motivation is 100% selfish and any benefits we get as consumers are secondary. I don't really see how it matters. The benefits to us as consumers are the same regardless of motivation.
- CaptArmchair 6y ago
  Exactly. > I don't really see how it matters. The benefits to us as consumers are the same regardless of motivation. This issue/debate doesn't take place in isolation. Consider it like casting a pebble in a pond: the waves cause all kinds of 2nd and 3rd order effects re-shape the environment in which things can happen. For one, the comment section already hints at how the perception of Apple as a brand is being re-shaped. The million dollar question is in what direction this will prompt both Apple and many other stakeholders down the line. If Apple gauges customer sentiment, what does it take away from that? And how will it act on changing sentiments? How is Apple going to capitalize on those changing sentiments? Not just purely in it's short-term commercial proposition, but also in it's long term vision and strategy. How will changing perceptions shape the relationship between Apple and public authorities scrutinizing Apple? Zooming out, this Apple adding a new feature: mandatory customer permission before sharing data. It sounds earth shattering novel but it really isn't in and of itself. That's what the GDPR has been enforcing since 2018. The key difference is Apple taking direct control over this transaction, instead of passively delegating things to the app developers. It's quite questionable if this move is going to create more awareness or change the playing field to a point where people stop installing the Facebook app and reach out towards alternatives. Far more interesting is seeing Facebook creating an ad as a response to this. You might think that this implies Facebook conceding defeat, but I don't think that's what's going on here. As far as FB is concerned, spending money on an ad is just a blip on its radar. It's above all a token display of dismay/disagreement towards Apple (that's what the article got right) and not much more. In the short run, this won't change much and it will mostly be business as usual. What matters is how this fits into a bigger power play between Facebook and Apple. The present fog of war makes it hard to make out right now, but the significance will become clear in the future.

2cb 6y ago

This is a very interesting post. And you're of course correct, Apple wouldn't take a pro-privacy stance if it was bad for business. They're able to do so because their business model relies primarily on hardware sales. Your points about Apple's position in the marketplace making it a part of consumer infrastructure, and the argument that Apple above all else wants to disassociate itself from the flack the rest of the tech industry as a whole is getting are also extremely valid. However, even if Apple's incentives are based entirely on self-interest (it's a corporation, so this is not exactly a groundbreaking revelation) that doesn't mean the end result cannot be in the consumer's best interest as well. Just as most people here would agree Facebook's business model works against the interests of the consumer, I'd argue Apple's business model is more in line with the best interests of the consumer even if Apple's motivation is 100% selfish and any benefits we get as consumers are secondary. I don't really see how it matters. The benefits to us as consumers are the same regardless of motivation.

CaptArmchair 6y ago
Exactly. > I don't really see how it matters. The benefits to us as consumers are the same regardless of motivation. This issue/debate doesn't take place in isolation. Consider it like casting a pebble in a pond: the waves cause all kinds of 2nd and 3rd order effects re-shape the environment in which things can happen. For one, the comment section already hints at how the perception of Apple as a brand is being re-shaped. The million dollar question is in what direction this will prompt both Apple and many other stakeholders down the line. If Apple gauges customer sentiment, what does it take away from that? And how will it act on changing sentiments? How is Apple going to capitalize on those changing sentiments? Not just purely in it's short-term commercial proposition, but also in it's long term vision and strategy. How will changing perceptions shape the relationship between Apple and public authorities scrutinizing Apple? Zooming out, this Apple adding a new feature: mandatory customer permission before sharing data. It sounds earth shattering novel but it really isn't in and of itself. That's what the GDPR has been enforcing since 2018. The key difference is Apple taking direct control over this transaction, instead of passively delegating things to the app developers. It's quite questionable if this move is going to create more awareness or change the playing field to a point where people stop installing the Facebook app and reach out towards alternatives. Far more interesting is seeing Facebook creating an ad as a response to this. You might think that this implies Facebook conceding defeat, but I don't think that's what's going on here. As far as FB is concerned, spending money on an ad is just a blip on its radar. It's above all a token display of dismay/disagreement towards Apple (that's what the article got right) and not much more. In the short run, this won't change much and it will mostly be business as usual. What matters is how this fits into a bigger power play between Facebook and Apple. The present fog of war makes it hard to make out right now, but the significance will become clear in the future.