Overconsumption in tech—are you falling victim to marketing?
Shreeka Thangarasu
Now that we're in the final quarter of the year, we've gotten to see companies roll out their latest renditions to their flagship lineups—namely, we got to see Apple release their iPhone 16 back in September and Samsung update their tablets with their new and upgraded tab s10.
Or wait, was it the s9?
I'm sure you've had a similar thought these past couple of years—and I don't blame you! I'm a huge geek when it comes to tech and even I get a little lost. I think somewhere between Sony's WH-1000XM4's and their WH-CH520's I sort of mentally tuned out (let this be a lesson to anyone looking to found a tech startup—do NOT let the engineers name the products.)
Something a lot people have started noticing recently, however, is the apparent lack of upgrades to these, well, upgrades. I mean, aside from swapping out the processor from a Snapdragon 8 gen 2 to a Snapdragon 8 gen 3, what really changed from the S23 to the S24? (And don't mention anything about Exynos because we all know no one's buying that godawful SoC.)
Just look at them, you could tell me this was the same picture copy pasted over and I'd believe you.
The average consumer (around 40%) changes smartphones every 2-3 years, with a whopping 14% of people reportedly updating theirs every single year. (SellCell) Considering the stagnancy in smartphone designs these past couple of years, I think it's safe to say design isn't the main reason why.
Most phones nowadays have an advertised 'shelf-life' of at least 4-5 years, that is to say, they will continue to receive security updates 4-5 years past launch. So in theory, a new phone should be good as new four years past the purchasing date, right?
Well, that's where I'd disagree.
Phones get slower—that isn't because new phones are faster—no, I mean phones literally get slower.
Don't believe me? Hear it from Apple themselves, who admitted to purposefully slowing down their phones in a lawsuit they eventually lost:
Apple claimed the measure was in order to protect the lithium batteries inside the devices, but truthfully? I believe this is a case of intentional obsolescence.
Intentional obsolescence: a business strategy where the process of a product becoming obsolete is intentionally planned and built into it from the beginning by the manufacturer. (ScienceDirect)
By intentionally slowing down older devices, Apple, and the hundreds of other companies who are culpable of this marketing strategy, subtly create an incentive for users to upgrade to newer models sooner than they otherwise might have. My point is further solidified by the fact that Apple eventually lost another class-action case for intentional obsolescence and was forced to pay out over $50 million USD in fines and payouts globally.
It's almost too easy nowadays. As consumers, we’re often conditioned to think that our devices are outdated the moment a new model is released. This is partly driven by marketing—companies often emphasize the latest model’s "next-generation" features, even if they’re only marginally better than the previous generation. The average person isn't going to pore over spec sheets and pull out GeekBench before making a purchase, they'll just hear the words 'new processor' or 'improved camera' and assume their old device is worse when it really isn't.
Our reality as consumers who can't realistically repair anything anymore definitely doesn't help this. The fact that opening your device, the device you own, voids your warranty should raise serious red flags, but as a society, I think we've gotten a little too comfortable with just letting corporations like Apple push us around in that sense.
There's also the allure of the shiny new object. No matter how good your current phone is, there's no doubt that there's something enticing about the idea of a new device. It's why receiving an Amazon package gives you an instant serotonin boost, or why getting a new lip balm at the pharmacy is basically mini-Christmas; we have been conditioned by companies that consumption, and by association overconsumption, is good. The excitement of upgrading—even when the actual performance differences are minimal—gives people that immediate sense of gratification, fueling the cycle of upgrades.
But it's not just the consumers who suffer—these practices also have devastating and often deadly implications. Tech is an expensive industry, both in materials and lives.
Cobalt mining in just the DRC alone kills an estimated 2,000 people yearly, many deaths unreported. Some estimates say there are as many as 255,000 people mining cobalt in the DRC, and over 40,000 of them are children (The Republic). Why cobalt you might ask? Cobalt is absoloutely essential in the production of semiconductors in microchips—that same Snapdragon 8 gen 3 that I mentioned earlier? Yeah, that needs cobalt. The Spadragon 8 gen 2 in the S23? Cobalt. Even the Exynos chips need cobalt, and they suck.
The same goes for lithium mining in Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, or tantalum, tin, tungsten, and gold mining (3TG) in Rwanda and Burundi. These ores are fundamental for tech and are also conveniently found in some of the poorest, most easily exploitable nations in the world in the global south, while all the companies that need these resources are also just very conveniently in the global north.
Many argue that this new age of unpaid child labour and resource exploitation is a branch of colonialism. I'm not saying major tech companies are colonialists per-se, but I am saying that they are heavily perpetuating neo-colonialism through their manipulative marketing.
This is all without mentioning the environmental impact that overconsumption in tech has. The amount of e-waste produced nowadays is staggering. According to the WHO, over 62 million tons of electronic waste are generated globally every year, with a significant portion of that being mobile devices. The environmental toll of constantly producing, shipping, and disposing of electronics is immense, and yet, the demand for newer models continues to fuel this cycle.
The constant exploitation of minerals in concentrated areas doesn't come without a price: it isn't a matter of if we'll run out or even when, but how much longer can we bide our time until then.
We’re in a world where the pace of innovation has outstripped most people's needs and we’re seeing an era of overconsumption that is increasingly unsustainable, both in terms of resources and the mental strain of keeping up. Overconsumption, in tech especially, goes far beyond digging into your pockets: these companies are quite literally digging into both the Earth's resources and its people.
While we chase the latest tech, millions of people in the global south are working under brutal conditions, digging up resources that power our devices. Our desire for the 'next big thing' is contributing to both their suffering and the decline of our planet.
So, what's the solution?
Funnily enough, I'd argue the solution to tech lies in tech.
The first shift has to be a change in product design. Tech companies have spent decades perfecting the art of planned obsolescence, I think it's about time they figure out how to make things actually last, don't you?
Imagine a future where companies prioritize modular designs that allow consumers to upgrade specific parts—like batteries, screens, or processors—rather than buying a whole new device every two years. We would be able to easily replace or upgrade the parts that matter to us the most, like the battery or camera, without having to throw away the whole device.
Now stop imagining, because that exists!
What you're looking at right now is a Framework laptop, designed with the intention of being taken apart, modified and messed with just the way you want to. And they're not the only ones, Fairphone is another company that creates products with repairability and customisation as a core value, and though this is still an immensely niche market, I believe there's a real reason to be excited over this.
Moreover, we need to begin pushing for software that actually improves your device's functionality, not render it useless. I think software is a very overlooked aspect when it comes to new product launches when it could be the difference between a laggy almost unusable experience and an enjoyable, intuitive user interface.
In the end, sustainable tech isn’t just about cutting back on new devices—it’s about rethinking how we design, update, and interact with the technology we already have. It’s about using the tools of the future to create a more responsible and efficient tech ecosystem. At its core, technology has always been about enhancing human life, solving problems, and making systems more efficient, and I believe real innovation lies in refinement and making what we have better, not just newer.
After all, is that not the spirit of innovation in tech?
Bonus! I'm curious, how long have you had your phone for? Let me know in the comments! I got mine four years ago and recently got it repaired, too.
Sources:
https://www.sellcell.com/blog/how-often-do-people-upgrade-their-phone-2023-statistics/#:~:text=14.0%25%20of%20people%20look%20to,an%20extended%20replacement%20cycle%20length.
https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-67911517
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/computer-science/planned-obsolescence#:~:text=Planned%20obsolescence%20is%20a%20business,unfashionable%20or%20no%20longer%20usable.
https://republic.com.ng/october-november-2023/congo-cobalt-genocide/#:~:text=In%20addition%2C%20up%20to%202%2C000,are%20spread%20across%20various%20groups.
https://www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/electronic-waste-(e-waste)#:~:text=E%2Dwaste%20is%20one%20of,collected%20and%20recycled%20(2).
Comments
Post a Comment