Newspaper editorials back Apple over U.S. government 8 to 1

“Support for Apple in its showdown with the FBI was slow coming in Silicon Valley,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune. “But once it arrived, it was nearly universal.”

“What about outside the nation’s high-tech corridor?” P.E.D. reports. “Sampling editorial pages of newspapers across the U.S., here’s what I found.”

Washington Post: Apple should not be forced by the government to decrypt users’ data. “To what extent is it reasonable to force companies to write new code and harm their international reputation for data security — and, therefore, their business models — in order to help the U.S. government hack into suspects’ phones?”

Dallas Morning News: Why Apple is right to fight order to help FBI. “The case has nothing to do with the dead terrrorist’s privacy rights and everything to do with the rights of everyone else in America.”

More examples in the full article here.

MacDailyNews Take: Public outcry and pressure in support of Apple can have meaningful results. U.S. citizens, contact your congressional representatives today!

SEE ALSO:
Apple likely to invoke First Amendment free-speech rights in against U.S. government backdoor demands – February 19, 2016
Donald Trump calls for Apple boycott over San Bernardino terrorist iPhone encryption – February 19, 2016
Secret memo details U.S. government’s broader strategy to crack phones – February 19, 2016
DOJ escalates war against Apple, files new motion to compel company to break into iPhone – February 19, 2016
Libertarian U.S. presidential candidate John McAfee offers to unlock terrorist’s iPhone for FBI – February 19, 2016
Apple is still fighting Big Brother – February 19, 2016
Apple co-founder Woz: Steve Jobs would have fought this U.S. government overreach, too – February 19, 2016
Mother who lost son in San Bernardino terrorist attack sides with Apple against U.S. government backdoor demands – February 19, 2016
iPhones don’t kill people, people kill people – February 19, 2016
Court extends deadline for Apple to oppose order to unlock iPhone – February 19, 2016
Twitter, Facebook, Box support Apple against U.S. government demand to hack iPhone – February 19, 2016
No, Apple has NOT unlocked 70 iphones for law enforcement – February 18, 2016
Apple is right, the U.S. government demand would make us all less secure – February 18, 2016
How Apple will fight the DOJ in iPhone backdoor case: U.S. government’s position stands on 227 year old law – February 18, 2016
USA Today alters logo to support Apple in fight against U.S. government overreach – February 18, 2016
Obama administration claims FBI is not asking Apple for a ‘backdoor’ to the iPhone – February 18, 2016
Privacy activists plan rallies across U.S. to support Apple in battle against U.S. government on February 23rd – February 18, 2016
Google CEO Sundar Pichai wishy-washy on Apple’s fight against U.S. government backdoor demands – February 18, 2016
Why Apple is fighting back against U.S. federal government demands for iPhone access – February 17, 2016
Snowden backs Apple in fight over iPhone; blasts Google’s silence – February 17, 2016
Obama administration: We’re only demanding Apple hack just one iPhone – February 17, 2016
Security firm shows how Apple could bypass iPhone security to comply with FBI request – February 17, 2016
What the Apple court order means for your smartphone privacy – February 17, 2016
EFF opposes U.S. government demand to force Apple to unlock terrorist’s iPhone – February 17, 2016
‘Who do they think they are?’ Donald Trump blasts Apple for not unlocking San Bernardino terrorist’s iPhone – February 17, 2016
Tim Cook posts open letter opposing U.S. government demands to bypass iPhone encryption – February 17, 2016
Apple CEO opposes court order to help FBI unlock San Bernardino terrorist’s iPhone – February 17, 2016
Apple wants judge to rule if it can be forced to unlock defendant’s iPhone – February 16, 2016
U.S. House lawmakers seek to outlaw states from banning encrypted iPhones – February 10, 2016
Obama administration wants access to smartphones – December 15, 2015
Obama administration’s calls for backdoors into encrypted communications echo Clinton-era key escrow fiasco – December 14, 2015

35 Comments

    1. Both Republicans and Democrats are guilty of trying to compromise privacy for security’s sakes. Under Bush you had the Patriot Act passed, you had his warrantless wiretapping, etc.

      You have Republicans in the Senate calling for a law to penalize companies like Apple for refusing these types of privacy requests.

      I support Apple, but let’s not get so tribal that we don’t see the other side. If you were in law enforcement, or an elected representative, and were charged with protecting the US from a terrorist attack, you would probably want to do everything you could to give yourself any advantage you could get. Because the moment a terrorist attack happens, the finger points right at you. That’s some heavy pressure.

      1. Everything you say is true. But we need to bear in mind that opinions are greatly inflamed during a presidential campaign, and the pressure to win votes is blindingly intense. You’ll grab a popular issue and use it to ignite your voter base to get elected, and worry about making good on your campaign promises later.

        Truth always comes to light much later than the promise.

    2. Here’s what has come out today. “The Apple ID used to sync Syed Ryzwan Farook’s iPhone 5c with Apple’s iCloud was modified less than 24 hours after the device was impounded by the government, BuzzFeed News reports. Apple says the San Bernardino County Department of Public Health, the phone’s owner and Farook’s former employer, changed the account passcode.”

  1. if the court can force them to unlock one phone, imagine if you have a parent going through dementia and the kids are fighting over who gets power of attorney to unlock the phone and wipe out his bank or her account first… no thank you. very bad precedent.

    1. For those who confused back door and unlocking/accessing info on a phone… Those who have created this way over the top frenzy …. And insulted many who argued they are not the same ..

      Read this piece of info just released .

      “Further, Apple has been conducting “regular” discussions with government entities since early January regarding methods by which data from Farook’s iPhone 5c may be recovered. According to the report, Apple proposed four different options for data recovery, none of which involved building a software backdoor into iOS.”

      1. The point is that the Government rejected all of those approaches to accessing this individual device because they want to force Apple into developing a tool that will allow access to any iPhone. The notion that their request is limited to this one handset is holding less and less water as time goes by.

      2. If true Apple proposed four ways to access data WITHOUT compromising the best in the business security OS, them what am I missing?

        Oh sorry, just remembered the government of hope and change …

    1. It’s so easy to lose one’s cool in a case like this.

      But no reason to insult the FBI. The moment you need the police you won’t be insulting them. And it can happen to you or anyone.

      When the FBI tracked down that Boston Marathon bomber, for instance, you didn’t have anyone complaining about the FBI.

      Let’s get real. Apple is doing the right thing. But those in law enforcement are simply trying to do their job as well, and are under heavy pressure.

        1. silverhawk1, I’m so glad you have such insight as to the inner mechanics of how those Boston Marathon bombers were tracked down. Yes, go ahead and pretend the FBI had nothing to do with it…that the FBI is useless, etc.

          That type of juvenile mentality gets us nowhere. All I’m saying is that the FBI does do a lot of good, most of which we never know about, if we knew we’d be more appreciative of what they do.

          And if you were an FBI agent on this San Bernadino case, you would want access to the bad guy’s iPhone. Because your job is to investigate the case, and prevent something like it from happening again. And that’s a pretty big responsibility to be charged with. Funny how after 9-11, in the immediate aftermath, no one complained about the police, the FBI, etc., because we understood how important they were.

          Apple is taking the right stand, IMHO, but the govt agencies, the police, the FBI, the Justice Dept, etc are not the bad guys. They just have different jobs and see things differently. That’s what democracy is all about, working this stuff out.

    1. “but it’s for one iPhone”

      No, this is where you are dead wrong. This is the just first and it WON’T be the last if the government can force Apple or any other company to do it. Don’t you get that?

      1. The slippery slope argument is useful and I believe in this case warranted.

        But let’s not kid ourselves…all of life is lived on the slippery slope. We have a police department…I am glad we do…but one could just as easily say, what if the Police got too much power and we became a police state?

        The govt can get a court ordered search warrant and barge into my house; they can wiretap my phone. Why not worry about the slippery slope there as well?

        Heck, if we really want to go to extremes, I could argue that I need to worry about eating, because I could eat too much and become obese.

        Most of life we have to choose somewhere on a spectrum between 2 extremes, keep trying to use our better judgement, and work it out over and over again. This case is no different. Heck, even the fact that Apple has already assisted the govt could be seen as troubling by some privacy advocates.

  2. Government doesn’t care about the terrorist, that is why they kill them instead of get them alive for interrogation.
    What the government is trying to do is to use the biggest company in the world to set a precedent and be able to open what ever secure system they want.

    1. Agreed.

      I suspected the same motive all along.

      Given the fact the current President has been unsuccessful getting a handle on Apple’s overseas cash pile, and in wake of the Snowden revelations, you nailed PRECISELY what this is all about.

      The administration for all to see values CONTROL over PRIVACY in the holy name of keeping us safe.

      The MO for over seven years is coming to an end …

  3. What about this?

    How does the rest of the world’s Gvernments react to this?

    Is playing hardball with the DOJ really the way to go?

    Will future Apple claims in Court be negatively affected by this show of force against the juridical system?

    What if Apple Headquarters were to be under threat and the data locked down on an iPhone could prove to provide information to help eradicate the threat?

    Just seems to be a slippery soap for Apple to be on.

    Joe

    1. Agreed but the folks in in California no doubt felt the same as you do. We live in very dangerous times. We ask our Gov to protect us but yet limit their ability to do based on an argument that benefits the criminals using devices that cannot be used to charge them or mitigate the risks of other events.

      1. Joe and Silverhawk both make good points…you can “what if” forever…but that works both ways, which is what Joe is saying…

        People against the iPhone being broken into are in essence saying, if Apple is forced to that, then “what if” this is used in other cases, even in other countries, for other ends?

        Either way there is a hypothetical risk posed.

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.