The Devil Was Once An Angel: Scrutinizing Apple using Marcuse’s Critique of Advanced Industrial Society

by Deane Nepomuceno and Gilliana Pangan

As the saying goes, be careful who you trust because the devil was once an angel. From its humble beginnings as a start-up tech innovation with an aim to improve computer experience, Apple has now evolved into a devil who will exhaust all means to control and dominate the lives of every Apple user. Apple, a multinational technology company, is now the world’s leader in electronics, software, and online services. It has become so famous that when you search the word “Apple” on Google, the first ten search results are about their company and not about the fruit where the company’s name is inspired from.

We analyzed an article entitled Against the Cult of Apple, a part of Slate Magazine’s The Evil List series where they list top evil tech companies and reveal the evil practices that foster social injustice ranging from unfair labor practices up to data privacy issues. The essay scrutinizes Apple’s evilness as the author enumerates different practices by the tech company which forges oppressive effects among its users. The article lists down the different facets Apple utilizes in order to dominate its users; from its design, servicing, and even how the company maneuvers state laws for its own gain.

In this essay, we will examine how the listed ways Apple dominates the tech world is related to Marcuse’s concept of technological domination, technological rationality, and false needs. At the same time, we will attempt to contextualize an observable Filipino culture in which we termed as “Greenhills culture” as an attempt to practice Great Refusal against tech companies, but at the same time, scrutinize the deficiencies that make it vulnerable to be another modus operandi for technological domination.

The first argument the author raised in the article is the “alpha and omega” of the company which is control. The design of Apple products particularly its very own App Store allows the company to control and limit what applications you are downloading with your phone. This tactic employed by the company blocks all applications and services that are not “registered” with Apple which means that all of your applications should be “approved” by the company. How Apple brands this strategy is that ‘Apple-approved’ is safe and trustworthy. Of course, as Apple users, this is how we believe it, but upon scrutiny, this technique employed by the tech giant is, of course, nothing but a profit-driven scheme. This resonates with Marcuse’s argument that “technology in the advanced industrial society is dominating because it is organized by the administrators of the society to serve their very own interests.” 

It can be further argued that this scheme is an act of domination not only for profit but also for a scheme to control how Apple users will behave. A case in point is the Apple Music, before, people downloaded music via the internet and can be saved through an external drive that can be played through your phone, your music player, your stereo, or your TV. Now, with Apple-controlled music streaming applications, the music is only limited to your Apple product, you cannot transfer it to your other devices unless it is also part of the Apple ecosystem, such as the Macbook, Apple TV, iPods, or iPads. Apple veiled itself under a delusion of people’s autonomy and convenience, if you want to live a convenient life, you need to buy more of their products. It is a continuous cycle of wanting more because it presents itself as the more convenient choice but in reality, the tech company already programmed you from the start of buying your first Apple product into buying more of their products because “it will make your life easier.”

How Apple designs their products and software reverberates Marcuse’s concept of technological rationality, that due to the design of technology, an “effectively and smoothly laid out its dominating power through the manipulation of needs (Ocay, 2010, p.59),” the people submit themselves unconsciously. This manipulation of needs leads to the proliferation of false needs in which Apple is the fitting example. The false need is reflected in how they sell and market their products—necessary accessories are not part of the package. If you buy an iPad and you want a “better” experience, you better buy their earphones (Apple AirPods), stylus (Apple pencil), keyboard (Apple keyboard) which are different (expensive) products. These false needs have become a status symbol, evident on how society labels an Apple user as “sosyal,” “yayamanin,” or “rich kid.” Even though you can buy other cheaper brands which sometimes offer more practical use, “the need for efficiency and convenience is now replaced by the immediate need of ‘identification’ (Ocay, 2010, p.60).” 

This technological rationality and the idea of people submitting to false needs fostered by Apple is fortified by the way tech writers call some Apple users as an Apple cult member because of how some if not most Apple users always follow the trends and every update of every product and as the article suggests, “rationalize away the company’s behavior, arguing that device owners don’t mind being forced to get their apps, parts, and service from Apple.”

But then again, technological rationality also implies that humans have a role in co-shaping technology, in this case, in Apple’s technology and mechanism. Some Apple users opt to not follow the conventional standards set by the company in repair and sometimes downloading applications, as there are existing software that can bypass the Apple system in order for you to download applications not supported or recognized by Apple, this is what we usually call “jailbreak.” Jailbreak because it allows you to be free from the confinement of Apple affordances, removing Apple restrictions over software and applications. But then again, Apple, of course, continuously applied ways to prevent these “fraudulent” techniques which then again, allows them to still be in control. Another prevention method Apple applies is the cancellation of the warranty once the jailbreak is applied.

Marcuse’s Great Refusal is a form of negation in words and in deed any form of technological domination which consists of all kinds of repression including exploitative labor practices, inequity, and continued enactment of an oppressive capitalist system that only favors the rich. In this case, we want to argue that “jailbreak” and “piracy” which we termed as “Greenhills culture” can be considered as a form of Great Refusal against the continued profit-driven schemes of tech companies.

Photo by TripAdvisor

Greenhills is a shopping center known for its large area of electronics technicians and repair shops, the center is considered a haven especially for Apple users who refuse to succumb to the Apple repair centers which do not actually repair their products but rather only recommend buying a new replacement of their product. The existence of numerous shops that repairs Apple products which by principle, Apple considers as illegal, may be a clear indication that people are not totally succumbed to technological domination, and that they are aware, there is a recognition of Apple’s repressive schemes, which means that there is a possibility of a “new sensibility” among tech users and there is an open chance for people to finally practice the Great Refusal. This reverberates the concept of Great Refusal because it reverts to the concept of technology as a contrivance of goods, which resonates with the Filipino saying,

“hangga’t magagamit pa, pwede pa.”

While this is an open possibility and resonates with Great Refusal because people have the opportunity to “enjoy the free play of their faculties (Ocay, 2010, p.68)” and they break away from the confinement by refusing Apple’s tactics, it is still repressive when analyzed on a broader scale ergo another way that propagates technological domination. Before, Greenhills only repairs and offers jailbreaks, but now, Greenhills has become a center for trading Apple products, people sell their old Apple devices to buy newer versions, and then the old products will be then sold to another person, the cycle therefore continues and is not destroyed. Since Apple is successful in positioning their brand as the leading tech company, so successful that it has already become a status symbol. The continued fixation of Filipinos towards pre-loved Apple products as seen in Greenhills and online still fortifies Marcuse’s argument on “identification with the social system” and that there is a need to “keep up with the neighbors.” which in result, forced people to work harder to achieve this sense of identification.

The author holds an obvious critical stance against tech companies that exploits its customers and laborers. Aside from the ‘dirty’ tactics Apple employed to maintain its tech dominance, the author also discussed the culpability of Apple in China’s human rights violations. While Apple stands firmly for data privacy, they are not the ‘angel’ as they seem to be as they are enablers of the Chinese despotic regime that took away lives—particularly the lives of Muslim ethnic minorities. They became enablers by denying Chinese people access to private networks or VPN on their App Store which the author claimed made “rounding up of these prisoners [Muslim ethnic minorities] easier.” 

This particular incident of Apple’s evil-enabling mechanism is a clear indication that technology is not “amoral” especially when they are controlled by people who know nothing but profit. The continued proliferation of technology pivoted for profit is an ever-evolving threat against humanity which, as evident in China’s case, can be utilized against equality, social justice, and freedom.

We need not look further, the Duterte regime and its lackeys recently passed the controversial Anti-Terror Law. We have to be wary of similar attacks the government and tech companies may implore against us, the very citizens they vowed to protect. The possibility of an attack is not anymore theoretical as the AFP Chief already made a recent pronouncement that they will “capitalize” on the law to control the use of social media veiled under the guise of fighting terrorism. This reminds us that the technology we are using does not exist in a vacuum—it is embedded within a social system, unfortunately, in a capitalist system where it serves as a tool for control and domination.

We found this article interesting as it offers another perspective on how the brand operates and dominates the tech world and its users. Typical articles would frame the brand’s domination as something that would benefit society, but this article goes beyond those norms and exposes the harsh realities of it. As we are both Apple users who, unfortunately, have succumbed to technological rationality, false needs, and capitalism that the brand shadowed through “new and improved” products, we have realized through this article that Apple controlled every single aspect of our experience with their products. We unknowingly became members of the “cult” we never knew existed simply through buying products we thought we needed. Reading this case would allow individuals to better understand the concept of technological domination, technological rationality, and false needs, and how it can be seen in the real world.

Moreover, this article is an eye-opener for Apple users and may serve as an opportunity to wake people up to revolt against the domination of technology that infringes on human rights and welfare. Marcuse’s Great Refusal is a difficult and tedious process, especially in a society and generation where technology is part of our daily lives. The article and its The Evil List series may serve as a catalyst for people to finally recognize the evil ways of tech companies, allow ourselves to introspect, and hopefully achieve “a new sensibility.”

Always ask ourselves—for whom?

It is now time to use Apple’s very tagline, “think different,” against them. 

Think different and attain a new sensibility. 

Think different and emancipate ourselves from the chains of technological domination.

Further readings:

• Doctorow, C. (2020, January 15). Against the Cult of Apple. Retrieved from https://slate.com/technology/2020/01/against-the-cult-of-apple.html
• Ocay, J. (2010). Technology, Technological Domination, and the Great Refusal: Marcuse’s Critique of the Advanced Industrial Society. Kritike, 4(1), 54-78.