Apple’s
decision to bow to Chinese officials by removing apps to sidestep online
censorship underscores the dilemma faced by US tech companies seeking to uphold
principles while expanding their business.
The iPhone
maker is the latest from Silicon Valley to face a conundrum in balancing their
value for human rights and free expression against a government intent on
controlling online content.
Apple this
week acknowledged it had removed applications for so-called VPNs or virtual
private networks, despite objections.
“We would
rather not remove the apps, but like in other countries, we obey the laws where
we do business,” Apple chief Tim Cook said during an earnings call.
“We are
hopeful that over time, the restrictions we are seeing are loosened, because
innovation really requires freedom to collaborate and communicate, and I know
that is a major focus there.”
The prospect
of Apple scoring a hit with a 10th-anniversary iPhone model in the months ahead
appeared to outweigh backlash from online rights activists who criticized the
world’s most valuable technology company for not standing up for online
freedom.
“There is a
belief that millennials really want companies to be more active in protecting
people’s rights and free speech,” Silicon Valley analyst Rob Enderle of Enderle
Group told AFP.
“There is
obviously no connection between the rhetoric and buying behavior at this
point.”
Chinese
internet users have for years sought to get around the so-called “Great
Firewall” restrictions, including blocks on Facebook and Twitter, by using
foreign VPN services.
“If other
companies follow Apple’s lead, it could soon be much harder for people in China
to access information freely online,” Amnesty International said in a blog
post.
“Businesses
have a responsibility to respect international human rights law… We would have
expected a more robust stance from Apple, a company that prides itself on being
a privacy champion.”
Under
pressure
Cook
maintained that the App Store in China remained stocked with VPN apps,
including creations from developers outside that country.
A commercial
VPN securely relays internet communications through a private channel, hiding
it from locals networks and, potentially, censors.
“This wasn’t
a choice they really wanted to make, and I’m not sure what they could have done
about it,” analyst Enderle said of Apple.
“They are
not doing well in China, and ticking off the leaders would certainly not help.”
Apple and
Chinese censors will ultimately “face a barrage of pressures” from each other
and from technology users in China, US-based internet rights group Electronic
Frontier Foundation (EFF) said in an online post.
“If Apple
makes too great a stand against China’s laws, it could be thrown out of the
country,” Eva Galperin and Amul Kalia of the EFF said in post.
“But if
China pushes its censorship system too hard, it will have to face the growing
frustrations of its own elite.”
They
reasoned that there was hope the crackdown on VPNs in China would recede when
the political climate there improves.
Android
upside?
There is a
history of US internet stars being humbled in China.
Yahoo a
decade ago wound up having to make amends after going along with Chinese
officials demanding help some identifying pro-democracy advocates who used
Yahoo online message boards.
Microsoft
has been doing business in China for some 20 years, staying within guidelines
set by the government.
Seven years
ago, Google pulled its search engine out of mainland China in a rare stand
against censors and for internet privacy.
“Google
stood up and left, and now they aren’t a power in China,” Enderle said of the
cost of the move.
However, the
removal of VPN applications in China by Apple could ramp up the popularity of
iPhone rivals powered by Google-backed Android software that lets people get
apps from unofficial marketplaces.
Apple’s
business model which requires users to install only approved applications,
ironically, makes it easier for a regime like China to exert control, analysts
point out.
Galperin and
Kalia of the EFF said the Apple policy “creates a single chokepoint for free
expression and privacy.”
0 Comments