Blog: Apple and Big Brother

When Apple created its legendary product, the Macintosh, it did so with a layer of revolution. In the iconic “1984” Ad, Apple cemented itself in the computer industry as the “anti-Big Brother.” Steve Jobs himself “saw IBM as Big Brother, and wanted to position Apple as the world's last chance to escape IBM's domination of the personal computer industry.” Since then, Apple has been feeding off of this in their product line. However, recently, the issue has returned to the limelight with Apple currently being embroiled in a battle with the FBI over privacy rights, something that directly challenges their stance of not dominating. In response to not being able to open the locked iPhone used by Syed Rizwan Farook in the deadly mass shooting in San Bernardino, California, the FBI has ordered that Apple revise or create a different program that would allow a “back door” to bypass the passcode, which, after 10 failed attempts, erases the phone’s data. Apple has put their foot down and refused to do so, citing their privacy rights and the ramifications for the future, and this has led to an ugly legal confrontation.

I’ve been reading about this issue since it first came to light, and I’m extremely fascinated by it. Especially since it directly pertains to something we have been learning about in AP US Government, which is the battle between order and freedom. How much control does the government have over us? How many individual liberties and freedoms must citizens sacrifice in the “best interests” of the whole country? These are extremely difficult questions that do not even have a definitive answer. In this case, Apple and FBI have taken their positions. Edward Snowden, the famed NSA spy, even threw his hat into the ring, saying that the FBI was "creating a world where citizens rely on Apple to defend their rights, rather than the other way around.”

While I do understand the need for the FBI to access the shooter’s iPhone, I think that fundamentally, Apple is correct in their response. Although one can argue that Apple has been dominating the industry, they have still stuck to their idea of being the “anti-Big Brother.” Customers have entrusted Apple with their privacy, and Apple is thinking of what the future could hold if they comply with FBI standards. Apple never signed an agreement to hand over their information, and they are a private business. If there is a search warrant, they do need to obey that, but they are not associated with the government. They are, in themselves, a world power, and they want to maintain that by not giving up the information. It is entirely justifiable. And if Apple says yes this time, there is no guarantee that the FBI won’t use this as a “back door” to require more information in the future. In fact, there are suspicions that this is the case.

Other companies, like Google, Amazon, Facebook, and Microsoft have rallied their support for Apple. In the end, without legitimate legal cause, Apple should win. They need to put their interests above, which is understandable in a company like this. Their Constitutional rights allow them to refuse this, and I hope that the FBI internalizes this in their pursuit. Apple does not want to be Big Brother. They want to maintain their privacy. This is a matter of national security, but the FBI has a bad track record when it comes to need (think NSA), so Apple has every right to not agree. It will be interesting to see this play out on March 22, and I am eagerly anticipating the response.