Apple’s privacy stance doubled as an attack on competitors’ ad revenue

Evidence

Apple’s maneuvers can be understood as a policing of its platform, which depends on payment. Hence, it could be seen taking the moral high ground on behalf of users, while also damaging its greatest rival, Google, at its point of greatest vulnerability. The adblocking campaign was, in the lingo, a twofer. — Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants, 1128 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The web, in theory, belongs to everyone, so no one likes an 800-pound gorilla telling them what to do there. But while Apple could be constitutionally controlling to a fault, in this case the wish to control the experience of its iPhone and iPad was a popular one. For as Apple had noticed, thanks to out-of-control advertising the mobile web was burning through the data plans, the battery life, not to mention the attention that all rightly belonged to its users, and violating their privacy for good measure. As the owner of the platform, and a company with no qualms about throwing its weight around, Apple was in a position to do something about the mobile web. Few who weren’t attention merchants had cause to complain. — Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants, 1120 (#expands, via linked claim)

Yet Apple tracks its users for many purposes and so does not contradict the trend of data colonialism, except that its business model does not generally depend on the sale of this data. Indeed, Apple receives substantial sums from Google for allowing it privileged access to iPhone users. A controversy developed when Apple’s iOS and MacOS systems were shown to collect information on user location and search activity. Apple’s subsequent Privacy Policy states that collected data “will not be associated with [a user’s] IP address,” yet iPhone features still support the surveillance needs of marketers. — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection, 81 (#qualifies, via linked claim)

Categorization

• XREF: connects to: Apple’s CEO publicly attacked its rivals’ data-mining business model in 2015; Apple’s adblocking simultaneously served users and injured Google. — Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants, 1128; Apple participates in data colonialism despite its privacy-branded marketing — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection: How Data Is…, 81 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Apple’s adblocking simultaneously served users and injured Google. #corroborates (0.92) — Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants, 1128
• Apple’s platform control over mobile web advertising was genuinely popular with users #expands (0.78) — Tim Wu, The Attention Merchants, 1120
• Apple participates in data colonialism despite its privacy-branded marketing #qualifies (0.75) — Nick Couldry & Ulises A. Mejias, The Costs of Connection, 81