The handset, according to the group, contains several toxic substances including brominated flame retardants as well as phthalates plasticisers and chloride, both substances characteristic of PVC (polyvinyl chloride). So far, it's been proven that the iPhone is only hazardous to one's health.. if you eat it. Who in their right mind would gnaw on an iPhone??
According to newsfeedresearcher, "Apple did not respond to inquiries for comment by press time, and the CEH said it had not heard back from the company as of yet."
Research: Apple took their time in addressing this issue. First, the price decrease of the iPhone that originally sold for $599, then this. Kudos to Apple for addressing the price issue in a timely manner. But unfortunately, Apple was not nearly as prompt in addressing this matter. They may have set themselves up by issuing a "green" statement (a promise to an environmentally safe phone) prior to the launch of the iPhone, then releasing a phone that is now reported as environmentally unsafe. Thus, this indicates that Apple did not engage in proper research.
In its defense, Apple responded to the report by reiterating its original "green Apple" statement, pointing out that the levels of chemicals in its products adhere to government standards. This statement does not fall in place with Greenpeace's findings. Also, it's hard to say what research Apple could have done prior to launching their phone, seeing that other competing manufacturers' products, such as Nokia and Sony, contain these toxins as well. Is Greenpeace targeting Apple?
Planning: Unfortunately, there was not much planning involved in this case because I believe Apple had hoped for the best and did not expect any complications in the launch of their iPhone. It is only for Apple to truly know whether or not they were releasing a phone that did not adhere to California state law and were simply hoping it would not be detected. To say that they could have planned for an escape route would be criminal, as this would have indicated a lack of civic concern. But, as the top innovators of technology, I'm sure they expected to be slammed in one way or another. It seemed they had a team of people on standby to address such a matter if need be.
Communication: Apple issued a statement on their website explaining their position on the toxic iPhones. They state that they will be removing toxic chemicals from their new products, but do not mention anything about a recall. No other methods or outlets of communication were found.
Evaluation: Apple should have conducted more research on the toxins within the iPhone prior to launching a "green" statement. By launching an environmentally friendly statement, then going out and releasing a product containing these toxins, diminishes Apple's credibility. But at the same time, I believe that Apple was doing the right thing by attempting to launch a "green" phone. Is it fair, or right, to slam a company for trying? So the iPhone contains potentially hazardous and cancer causing chemicals, I get that. But it's reported that peanut butter contains cancerous ingredients as well. Are they going to sue "Skippy", too?
It is difficult to measure the extent in which Apple has gone in order to clean up this mess and their image because from what I have researched, they have not utilized any other outlets other than their own, to convey their message of apology. It may have been far more effective for Apple if they had taken their stand on a few major networks.
Watch the CNN video of the toxic iPhone here.
4 comments:
I think this case leaves a lot of room for you to develop you own opinions of Apple. Personally, I think Apple is very concerned with being the leader in technology, and will quickly make and launch new products in order to be the most technologically advanced. I do not think that Apple has any real concerns for the environment and creating "green" products.
However, looking at Apple's PR response to the charges of not being "green" I think they did a good job. Other than being slow to issue a statement, when they did the statement was informative. I think by explaining in full detail about the toxins and how they are planning to be removed and become more environmentally friendly Apple gained back most of their credibility that may have been lost in response to this case.
Thanks, Sarah. I don't think there is much doubt that many of the materials inside our cell phones, computers, and other electronic devices are toxic. Problem is how to keep consumers safe and protect landfills from filling up with unused phones, computers, etc.
You pointed out that Apples promotes itself as a "green company." This seems to be trendy. Personally, I think companies like Apple could do a better job explaining what this means. I think each product ought to come with a recycling kit that we could we could use to dispose of the product. I would like to see more PR about that.
One thing for sure ... you don't want to have Greenpeace on your case. Apple needs some good PR to keep the pressure off.
Mark
P.S. Thinking back to Danny P's video of an iPhone being blended, I wonder what kind toxins were released by the "will it blend" dude? Whoa ... hope he was wearing mask!
Sarah I love your blog title that really sucks in a reader. I think it's important that our headlines capture readers in our PR future, because it's one thing to have a press release published, it's another to have someone really read it. So kudos to you on marketing your blog well. I think Apple is not doing so well with this IPhone. You're right about the Green thing. How can you market yourself as green with toxic chemicals and no solid recycling efforts. I hope they aren't just throwing out faulty pieces in their factories. I think Mark is right by suggesting solid recyling efforts. I always put my Hewlett Packard ink cartridges in the recycling envelope that some with my new ones and send it off in the mail for free! This is a great green thing for Hewlett Packard, as they pay the postage and all you have to do is drop the cartridge in the envelope seal it (It's a sticker seal, so you don't even have to lick it) and put it in the mailbox. What a great idea. Staple gives you a discount for reusing ink cartridges. What does Apple do?
This is the second post about Apple we have come across in the past two months. First, about cutting the price of the i-phone now about their products containing potentially toxic substances. In both the first case and in this one Apple has failed to practice successful Public Realtions tactics. They clearly launced this green statement far too early and will now have to deal with the consequences. So in reality they will be doing more research, planning and communication to solve this issue. I think that Apple needs to slow down and quit worrying about being the leading name in technology and spend more time doing research on their products!
Post a Comment