Apple likes to position itself as a sustainable, environmentally friendly and generally proactive company. Solar panels sparkle on the roof of the headquarters, there are repeated reports of successes in the clean energy supply of suppliers, and product presentations refer to the recycled material. Nice and good. But what about AirTag holders, watch bands, iPhone cases and other leather accessories in the Apple Store? How does leather production and everything related to it fit into the image of the environmentally concerned iPhone maker? It does not fit. And an alleged leak on Weibo seems to indicate that Apple is gradually getting the hang of it.
Chapter in this post:
Apple cases for the iPhone 15 (Pro) are no longer made of leather
On the Chinese platform Weibo.cn, the user "UnclePan潘叔" reports that Apple will refrain from using leather as a material this year, at least with regard to its own cases for the new iPhone models. "As I said before, there is no leather case for the iPhone this year", the post says (translated). "Instead, there is a woven cover. I just checked with the factory. Look at the finish and the color. It's basically the same style […]" Dem Post attaches a photo showing five iPhone cases. Above all, the blue cover on top looks like it was woven.
UnclePan and other accounts are given a leap of faith
Secondary sources that also report on this topic claim that UnclePan and other accounts have already provided correct information from Apple's supply and manufacturing chain in the past. That's why the new woven iPhone cases are getting a lot of attention. The accounts have on Twitter or X @duanrui1205 and @MajinBuOfficial each shared the same four photos of a black and purple case. Although this is not an original from Apple's production line, it is a replica based on the corresponding specifications for the original. Leather should also be avoided here. In addition, the cases seem the Rumors about the deeper case and the action button to confirm.
Apple's leather accessories: Everything can be replaced!
If you search for "leather" in the Apple Store on Apple.com, you'll find AirTag keychains, various Apple Watch bands, the MagSafe wallet (the most unnecessary of all Apple accessories, in my opinion), numerous iPhone cases and iPhone folios, MacBook cases, iPad cases and iPad folios, and last but not least, a leather case for the Apple pencil. And third-party products as well. All of this can be replaced by offerings made from sustainable materials and recycled fabrics. And if it absolutely has to be a shade of brown as a color and a leather feel, then you can now fall back on numerous animal-free alternatives.
Leather is not a “clean” waste product from the meat industry
To anticipate comments with the bogus argument that leather is a by-product of the meat industry: no, it's not like that. Even if the slaughter of animals here and there serves both areas at the same time, this is not the case everywhere. Cows and other animals are often killed solely for their skin. The same is then not treated in a particularly environmentally friendly way. It is not for nothing that tanning and dyeing, which can be kept as cheaply as possible, is often outsourced to countries in which not too much attention is paid to occupational safety and environmental protection. Child labor and toxic chemicals are the order of the day. So there are more than enough reasons to leave leather behind; not just for Apple.
Here are two more documentaries (not for the faint of heart):
- Dirty Leather - How our shoes are made – SWR, 2021
- poison on our skin – ZDF, 2013
Related Articles
Sir Apfelot newsreel week 48, 2023- Sir Apfelot newsreel week 47, 2023
- Vodafone campaign: iPhone 15 with business tariff, unlimited data volume and AirPods Pro (sponsor)
- New scam: AMOS malware is distributed via fake browser updates
- Fuzzy Feelings: Apple's Christmas commercials with questionable messages
- Listen: Interview with Tim Cook on the BBC podcast “Dua Lipa: At Your Service”
- Sir Apfelot newsreel week 46, 2023
- What's coming to the iPhone with iOS 17.2
[On vacation] After graduating from high school, Johannes completed training as a business assistant specializing in foreign languages. But then he decided to research and write, which led to his independence. He has been working for Sir Apfelot, among others, for several years now. His articles include product introductions, news, instructions, video games, consoles and much more. He follows Apple keynotes live via stream.
“So there are more than enough reasons to leave leather behind; not just for Apple.”
To be honest, I think this is a personal opinion, not a fact. So it shouldn't be stated as a fact in an article. With all the love for this site, this is a personal opinion and has no place in an article that is not marked as an opinion! As a reader, I don’t want to be “educated” like that.
Hello Ollie! I'll answer for Johannes because I think he won't be reading comments again until tomorrow. We generally stay out of political discussions here on the blog, but when it comes to leather we agree: we no longer want to introduce products that are made of leather. I reject things like that and I notice that the accessory manufacturers are seeing that the number of people who want to avoid leather is increasing.
Personally, I don't want to lecture anyone and I think Johannes feels the same way. Of course you can still use leather if you like.
However, I also see my website or blog as a place where I can give my opinion, because that's what a lot of people come here for: They want to know what I think of this or that product. And Johannes is invited to write articles here and these may also contain his opinion. And if his opinion is that he thinks there are more than enough reasons to stop using leather, then I'm fine with that. Of course you could turn the sentence into the following: “In my opinion, there are more than enough reasons to leave leather behind; not just for Apple”. Would that be something you could live with then? LG, Jens
Write an “Opinion:” or “Comment:” in the heading before the title, then it would be perfect (still not my opinion then, but fine). ;-)
Yikes, I didn't even see that you had already replied. Thanks in advance for that, Jens! I actually have a different opinion about leather, but that's fine - so you might have a different opinion about it. I didn't want to start the discussion here either.
I was just against the presentation as facts here in the article (or would like to have evidence for it; I don't want to rule out the possibility that Johannes has sources that might also offer me a new perspective). If, as just suggested (I thought it would be a supplement to my post and, as I said, I didn't even see your answer), I would simply add an opinion or comment to it, I would find it a completely clean journalistic solution.
The sentence you suggested would at least be much better, because it would also make it clear that an opinion is a conviction.
Anyway, thanks for responding to my criticism! :-)
Good luck, Ollie
Hello Ollie! Thank you for your constructive way of dealing with the matter. Unfortunately, that is not always the case here. I think you would have to write an “opinion” almost before every heading in the articles here, which might make things a bit confusing. Therefore, I would be more in favor of rephrasing the sentence. But ultimately it's Johannes' article and I don't want to fumble around in his article without him being able to provide feedback. I think he'll have his say tomorrow too. 😊 Until then, good luck to you too and good night too!
Hello Ollie,
Thank you for your comment and also thank you for making it more factual, as Jens has already pointed out. Unfortunately, we have already seen completely different things.
Here is my summary answer to all the appropriate points:
The sentence you are criticizing is a conclusion in a blog post. The emphasis is on "blog". This is a website on which it by definition about personal views. Sure, I usually keep them out of instructions, advice, news, event summaries and the like. On the one hand because there is simply no opinion worth mentioning, on the other hand because it is not my own blog, but I keep in mind when writing that I work for Jens' side here. But that doesn't change the nature of the website and the form of publication that is possible on it.
So you are reading a blog here, which is why I do not see the need to mark articles, paragraphs or sentences as opinions, comments or similar, nor will I make any changes in this case. Also and above all because it would not change anything about the general content of the contribution or the understanding of it.
I also didn't use the word "fact" anywhere. I listed facts beforehand and then linked two detailed documentations on the subject, but that was about it. By the way, these are the “evidence” that you are asking me in a “journalistic” manner – animal cruelty, child labour, exploitation of the poorest living conditions, environmental pollution from chemicals discharged into rivers and the diseases they cause, exceeding limit values in the products, etc. You are also a responsible Internet user who, if he finds too little information in one place, can continue to search independently in another.
Furthermore, nowhere is it claimed that this is a journalistic article. While I'm honored that my craft is considered journalism here, I see myself as an editor at best (and basically work as a copywriter here). I research, I summarize, I publish. And, as noted above, in a blog where (my)opinions are sometimes expressed. Do I? inkjet printers as junkwhether Jens Solar power banks called nonsense or if I'm in one Articles about mainframe computers include an excerpt from Jurrasic Park – you have not yet criticized all this as journalistically unclean.
I therefore believe (this is now my very personal, subjective opinion) that you ascribe a didactic character to the sentence you criticize because it does not correspond to your opinion. I believe that it is the same here as with many topics where ethical and moral attitudes meet long-established processes (in this case: leather is bad vs. leather has a long tradition): you feel attacked, or at least one of your opinions is attacked and want to defend it. But since nothing can be found in the content, you go into the form. But this corresponds to the medium that you consume.
That's why I don't see any reason to change it.
From my own experience, I recommend a more neutral approach: close the article you don't like and start something nice with the next few minutes. If I read an opinion on the Internet that I don't agree with, then I now stop discussing it. Because they usually don't do anything. I'd rather make myself a snack and sit down with it on the balcony. It takes the same amount of time, but I have a lot more fun doing it. After a few times you also realize how unimportant the avoided online discussions are by and large. Rather practice a little self-care.
So I'll leave it at this comment, which I think sums up everything I have to say on the subject.
TL; DR:
– This is a blog, so by definition a website where opinions can be published without having to be explicitly labeled.
– I see no reason to change the content or the title of the post.
- The "receipts" required by you are already included in the form of text explanations and links.
– This is not a journalistic text, I am not a journalist, and journalism also has nothing to do with the purely neutral communication of information that is unaffected by opinions or at least summarizing conclusions.
– I see your statements as an impulse to defend an opinion that differs from the one presented. This is fuel for endless online discussions that usually lead nowhere but frustration. So I'll leave it at this one comment on this topic.
Best regards
John
Hi John,
Thank you too for your very detailed answer. It didn't need that much. The simple note “is only a blog, not a journalistic offer. And done! Then my comment would be (or is) inappropriate. Point! You don't have to look for all the other possible explanations for my hint. ;-) I simply didn't notice scrap or nonsense (but then they are suitable examples, right).
In fact, I had clearly classified you as an info page and sorted it into my bookmark folder "Mac & Co." for a few years. That's the only mistake. So not that I categorized you there, but that I considered it a news site and no longer a blog.
I didn't want to discuss the point of leather or not, that would be a completely different question (although I'll look for the conditions you mentioned, I'm capable of learning ;-) . Nevertheless, it is often said against Apple that "they use materials themselves that are obtained through child labor" and I don't just believe that without any proof or evidence. But as I said, that would be a completely different point and I really didn't want to start anything here - let alone just troll or blaspheme.
So it was really my fault. Point. Is everything. ;) When it comes to personal entries in a blog, I don't find your sentences too instructive either. You're not what I believe, I can see that, and okay. On the contrary: Since I appreciate your blog and your tips, I don't consider the attitude towards leather to be a purely ideological vegan statement (that's how it sounds to me), but I'm willing to take a look at the facts about leather. Certainly not overly motivated, I'll admit, but still!
By the way, before I wrote my note yesterday, I had looked again to see if I could find a "definition" of your site somewhere, but found above all "In the Sir Apfelot Blog you will find guides, instructions and test reports on Apple products such as iPhone, iPad, Apple Watch, AirPods, iMac, Mac Pro, Mac Mini and Mac Studio.” – it all sounds very factual. And I've only now looked at the definition of blog again and brought my knowledge back into shape!
At the same time, the term blog is also a bit vague, see Wikipedia: “At the same time, some blogs established themselves as respected media. In order to conceptually delimit the different characteristics of the blogs, one speaks of information blogs and opinion blogs, which also differ from each other organizationally.[3] Opinion blogs can not only serve to communicate private opinions, but can also be editorially designed information pages that are intended to help form opinions; the definition of terms is then no longer given or the transition can be fluent. Since the distinction is not always clear, journalistic blog operators are paying more attention to clearly distinguishing and identifying the content within the same blog, e.g. For example, this happened on Spiegel Online in 2015.”
Source: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blog
I think the last point there is good - but of course that doesn't oblige all blog operators to do something similar. I was just too stupid to differentiate between a blog and a journalistic offer!
Oops! Oh, and now at the very end I see that you actually linked to two documents. :-o Were they really there yesterday? You have to, otherwise you wouldn't say it. Mea culpa again - I didn't see that! But apparently I fell asleep completely! Admittedly, I had a 12,5 hour day yesterday, please take that as part of the explanation for my attention bankruptcy, which I obviously suffered there.
Thanks also to Jens and: I think it's good that you reacted and suggested a possible solution, but _didn't_ simply "tinker" with Johannes' article! Honest!
Sorry for all the many words, it was just my mistake that I misclassified your blog as a pure information site.
Anyway, something completely different: When I clicked on Forum yesterday (looking for information about whether your blog is a blog or an info blog or blog blog or whatever :-D ), Trend Micro AV ( unfortunately must have installed an AV program for professional reasons, TM is at least not unpleasantly noticeable due to the rotating fans) that is not the case, the site is insecure. I had to add them to the exceptions first. Trend Micro has never done it before.
Thanks & congratulations, Ollie
Hello Ollie! Thank you for the long explanation and the nice way of dealing with the matter. I'm glad we're all happy now. 😊