Facebook exec says Apple users are an ‘exclusive club, available only to aspirant consumers with the means to buy high-value hardware and services’

Jake Kanter for Business Insider:

Facebook has launched its latest strike on Apple in a war of words that has dragged on for more than 15 months.

This cold war continued on Monday when Nick Clegg, Facebook’s recently hired head of global affairs and one of CEO Mark Zuckerberg’s top lieutenants, spoke on a stage in Berlin.

“Facebook is free — it’s for everyone,” he said. “Some other big tech companies make their money by selling expensive hardware or subscription services, or in some cases both, to consumers in developed, wealthier economies. They are an exclusive club, available only to aspirant consumers with the means to buy high-value hardware and services.”

Clegg was speaking just a week after Apple CEO Tim Cook gave a commencement speech at Stanford University in which he savaged the “chaos factory” created by social-media firms. “It feels a bit crazy that anyone should have to say this, but if you built a chaos factory, you can’t dodge responsibility for the chaos,” he said.

Again, there was no mention of Facebook, but the target of his argument was clear.

Facebook executive Nick Clegg
Facebook executive Nick Clegg
MacDailyNews Take: Apple users are an “‘exclusive club, available only to aspirant consumers with the means to buy high-value hardware and services.”

Why, yes. Yes, we are. 😁

1.4 billion strong and growing! With our privacy and personal data intact (unless we use Facebook).

Here’s who leads Apple employees:

A few years ago, users of Internet services began to realize that when an online service is free, you’re not the customer. You’re the product. — Apple CEO Tim Cook, September 2014

Here’s what Facebooks minions toil for:

Instant messages sent by Mark Zuckerberg during Facebook’s early days, reported by Business Insider in May 2010:

Zuckerberg: Yeah so if you ever need info about anyone at Harvard
Zuckerberg: Just ask
Zuckerberg: I have over 4,000 emails, pictures, addresses, SSNs
Zuckerberg: People just submitted it.
Zuckerberg: I don’t know why.
Zuckerberg: They “trust me”
Zuckerberg: Dumb fucks


If you trust Mark Zuckerberg to be the keeper of your photos, contacts, political views, religious beliefs, etc., you’re batshit insane. — MacDailyNews, May 23, 2018

#DeleteFacebook.

20 Comments

  1. Facebook is “FREE” because you, the dear consumer, are THE PRODUCT. The fact that they need to denigrate a competitor of sorts is telling.They have problems.

      1. We use FaceBook as an RSS feed. Our CMS automatically reposts our article headlines and links them back to our website. That is our only interaction with Facebook and has been our only interaction with Facebook for years. We deleted our personal accounts [which we opened only so we could understand the Facebook phenomenon] many years ago.

        If you want to share photos and videos with friends, text them using Apple’s end-to-end encrypted iMessage service. You need to control your social networking, not cede it to a gatekeeper like Facebook.

        — MacDailyNews, March 19, 2018

    1. I’ve recently seen articles pointing out that Facebook, Google, and other surveillance-supported services, by being “free,” actually cost too much. The value of what they extract from users isn’t being paid to users. The users should be paid to use the service, so the “free” cost is actually too high. The cost should be negative!

      Interesting point, and one that has started to appear in discussions around anti-trust violations, where a product or service being too expensive is an issue. Arguably, these “free” services actually DO have artificially high pricing, since the users should be paying negative amounts of money, so zero is too high.

  2. What Facebook is saying about Apple is right. Apple is deliberately ignoring the masses in a quest for profitability. It’s a damn shame how many people won’t ever get the chance to use Apple products. I’ve used Apple products since the 1980’s and I think the prices are rising too quickly in comparison to the rest of the market.

    Tim Cook needs to pay less attention to how Facebook makes its money and focus more on how Apple could make more money other than bleeding consumers. They should try bleeding the corporations instead.

    Consumers don’t care if they are products of Facebook and they will continue to use that “free service” a lot longer than they’ll continue using Apple products. Wall Street loves Facebook a lot more than they do Apple and Facebook will likely outperform Apple in share gains. Zuckerberg is a force to be reckoned with and I think even the Feds are scared of him. The Feds will go after Apple which is an easier target especially because of all the internet hate constantly directed at Apple.

    Facebook’s data breaches aren’t slowing down Facebook’s growth and certainly not as fast as Apple’s declining iPhone sales. Apple should increase overall market share instead of stiffing loyal long-term Apple users. Obviously, this is just my opinion and it’s worth nothing. My gut feeling tells me there is more hate against Apple than there is against Facebook and I don’t think it should be that way. I believe whomever is behind Apple’s high price increases is making a mistake because it’s helping to drive loyal customers and potential customers away. I’m sticking with Apple because their products are worth the price to me, but most consumers aren’t that generous.

    We shall see how both Apple and Facebook perform the rest of the year and I’m willing to bet Wall Street favors Facebook over Apple. Enough said.

    1. Half of your comment is about Wall St and how it values FB and Apple. That’s where you went wrong.

      Then you attempt to paint Apple as greedy, when everyone knows that Facebook’s whole purpose is to milk your personal data for a profit, privacy be damned.

    1. ‘Most of the people can afford Apple; maybe not the Pro line; maybe not the current year or two but the year before, or the refurbished or the newer, returned line; maybe any line of any item by paying out the implement over 12, 20 or 24 months, or put it on the Apple based Barclay’s card which, live any other charge card will give you a minimum payment of a very little amount each month. But whatever the solution, there is one for just about anyone with decent credit.

      Or, just ask for some friend or family member to pass an iPhone, iPad or whatever to them when they are finished with it. I personally have given away to less-able friended my one-year old iPhones, two-year old iPads, and the same for iPods when in vogue for no cost at all. I figured the $300-400 I received from a buyer like Gazelle would do nothing for me and giving my one-year old iPhone would help someone else much more than a few paltry dollars would do for me.

  3. Nick Clegg is the problem. He swapped a career creating vast wealth inequality in the UK for a mansion on the west coast and the chance to spout propaganda for the world’s worst social media company. He’s the lowest of the low. A lickspittle. A jacksnipe. A cad.

    1. “They are an exclusive club”… as spoken by one of the Facebook 1 percenters, who have gotten rich by behaving like trailer trash, peering through your windows and stealing everything they could.

  4. Apple used to be positioned as premium, but not exclusive luxury. Macs and iPods would cost a little more, but never to the point of being out of reach for most. (“This is the best 50 bucks you’ll ever spend”)

    The more recent change making Apple a luxury brand is something I don’t agree with. Devices are more expensive, but they’re also more limited. Form has much more emphasis over function. Current gen Apple laptops don’t have the legendary longevity of their forerunners. Faults are resolved with entire replacements rather than localised repairs.

    But hey, this is how things are and it’s my choice to continue buying into it, I suppose.

  5. I want privacy and I think how these social media companies selling you as a product while hiding behind confusing tech and misleading legalese is bad.

    (I sold all my Google stock some years ago, probably losing 100% or more gains since then, but kept my aapl because I was just uncomfortable with them especially after Schmidt ‘the Mole’s’ betrayal)

    but all that said I wonder if Apple should continue waging war with Google, Facebook.

    These are social media advertising companies, well versed in manipulating media.
    Google already admits it ‘tweaks algorithms ‘ to ‘improve’ search results. Maybe all the negative news we get about Apple is due to these ‘improvements ‘. Facebook’s manipulation of newsfeeds is already legendary. Facebook can pump it’s propaganda relentlessly to 2 billion users.

    What I mean it’s hard for Apple to win a PR war (especially on a topic privacy which apparently few people care about, look at 80% Android marketshare ) against PR companies. it’s THEIR forte.

    Maybe Apple instead of public soap boxing in colleges and newsrooms etc should just stick with advertising. Ads that say with Apple your info is safe.

    just my 2 cents as an ex marketing guy.

  6. Blackberry too was once limited to ‘exclusive people’. I don’t understand the fanboyism here where people love paying far more just because they think that they are ‘more’ secure.

Add Your Feedback

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