If you’re reading this blog post, you are almost certainly doing so on a digital device made in China. And that means you’re almost certainly doing so on a device made in Shenzhen.

Don’t know where Shenzhen is? Neither did I. It’s here:

View Larger Map

It’s a city bigger than New York or London, yet it was built only in the last 30 years. It’s one of China’s largest manufacturing hubs, and thus where ‘all our shit’ gets made. By hand. In 15 hour shifts. By workers as young as 12.

Conditions are poor. Really poor. You would not want to do this, and you would not want your children to do this. No one is allowed to speak while on shift.

If you use these products, which we all do, and if they’ve helped save you hours of labour time by speeding up communication, then you can damn well afford the 40 mins it will take to sit and listen to this piece on This American Life about a reporter who went to the factories of Shenzhen, and what he found. Let me put it more clearly: if you are reading this, you have a duty to listen to this.

Do it now.

//

Having listened, I’ve been thinking about the workers there, and it seems that things are coming to a head in terms of protest. Here’s a Reuters report from yesterday:

Thousands of Chinese workers protesting over compensation and job security at a Sanyo Electric Co Ltd plant clashed with police in southern Shenzhen, media said on Monday, the latest outbreak of labor unrest in China’s manufacturing hub.

In case that leaves you panicked – don’t be. The article continues: ‘No impact was expected on clients from the stoppage at the factory…’ Phew. All your devices will still get made.

The FoxConn plant, which makes pretty much all of Apple’s products, as well as things for other major brands, was also in the news as a ‘mass suicide’ was planned a few days ago by 150 workers protesting at appalling conditions there.

I’ve blogged about this here before (Expensive Machines Made by Cheap People), but I do think it’s high time that people began to take more notice, and put pressure on Apple and others to demand that conditions are improved. Yes, that’ll mean we pay more for products… but do you not kind of think that that’s worth it?

With the writing I’m doing on piracy I have been mulling whether conditions in these factories are in any way analogous to the oppressive regimes sailors found themselves in in the early 1700′s. In both cases they were doing semi-skilled hard labour that made other people incredibly rich, but left them injured and impoverished. The question is, what would a Chinese manufacturing piracy look like? Hijacking of containers of new iPhones ready for export? Now THAT would get the Hipsters in a twist to do something…

It seems extraordinary that in a Communist country workers are having to battle for fair access to the wealth that is being created… but as Western capitalism finds a new host with cheaper labour, it’s perhaps not surprising at all. I’m really not sure what the best step forward is here, and how it might best be possible to put pressure on Apple and others… any ideas or links, do share please.

I’m aware of the cult of mac dangers of sychophancy today… but also wanted to mark the passing of someone who did have a big impact on who are and how we live today, both positive and negative. This speech, given to Stanford graduates in 2005, is moving and prescient, but what I want to focus on this section:

No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don’t want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because death is very likely the single best invention of life. It is life’s change agent. It clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now the new is you, but someday not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it is quite true. Your time is limited, so don’t waste it living someone else’s life.

There’s something powerful about this, but also troubling. Yes, we need to see our own finitude as a motivation to make the most of the life we’ve been given, and to be the best person we can. But the troubling flip-side in Jobs’ philosophy is the culture of constant upgrade – and it’s ironic that his death comes so soon after the hyped announcement of Apple’s latest product. The iPhone4 is SO last year. I’ve heard so many people discussing whether they will get rid of their 4 in order to get their hands on a 4S in a couple of weeks…

This is absurd. Yes, we must see death as a healthy change-agent, and the old must be cleared to make way for the new. But also, and this is where Apple has been at the vanguard of the sickness of consumer capitalism, we need to re-learn how to make the most of what we have, rather than obsessively get rid of things in order to upgrade to the latest and ‘best.’

Jobs fought valiantly against cancer, against uncontrolled growth and multiplication of something healthy into something tumorous and dangerous. So as we celebrate his life and legacy, and think of his family grieving after a horrible illness, I think it’s appropriate to take a moment to think about appropriate consumption, and the gadget footprint we may be leaving in discarded phones, laptops and other devices… RIP.

(HT Barry for the great image)

The times are always a-changing. No matter how much we would like the status quo to remain, it never does. The movements that are happening in the Arab world are testament to this.

At a more benign level, Steve Jobs is going to die. It’s not a prediction based on his current health, just a statement of the obvious. We’re all going to die. It’s just that not all of us are figureheads of culturally important organisations – and our passing may not provoke huge movements in stock value, or a worried furrowing of thousands of hipster brows concerned about what Apple is going to be when jJobs does leave.

The question of succession is a very important one, and for organisations with a charismatic founder/figurehead it is perhaps the most important one. (For the past 26 years the manager of Manchester United has been Alex Ferguson. He can’t go on forever, and I’m really not sure how anyone will be able to take his place. Without doubt the club will suffer a blip.) But for Apple perhaps the worst possible scenario would be to keep asking the question ‘What Would Jobs Do?’

As soon as this becomes the governing dynamic the organisation is no longer a living, evolving organism, but just a shrine to a past time – an attempt to venerate one person’s vision, rather than sustain the spirit of that vision.

The religious parallels are obvious. All faiths must lose their ‘great leader’ and the key question is how they then move on from that moment. Islam (and Christianity to some extent) suffered from serious schism at the point of succession – arguments breaking out about who was the better person to carry on the vision that Mohammed had started.

The difference in Christianity is that we have been gifted a mechanism of succession through Pentecost: the ‘spirit’ of the great leader is literally shared out among his deputies. I’ve written here before about Christian community being unique in that it gathers around an absence – and it is the acceptance of that absence that I think is vital. To spend energy trying to fill that absence by redoubling the energy, by trying to conjure the great leader back to life with his image plastered over every surface, his words repeated like mantras and ossified into commandments – all of this is to move towards the death of the living community and into… dead religion.

A story I was told, which I repeat here but claim no verification for, is that when John Wimber died some of those who were closest to him remained sat in the front row of the Anaheim Vineyard – the ‘mega church’ that he had led – and either nodded or shook their heads at what was going on. ‘What Would John Have Done’ became the governing ethic… and attendance at the church plummeted very quickly.

To be honest, I couldn’t care less about what happens to Apple, and I wish Jobs well for his recovery. But it will be very interesting to observe how the faithful respond to his inevitable passing, and how the succession process will be handled by those left in charge.

This is something I’m really keen to discuss at the next Apple – Apple on Apple – which will be on March 16th, 7:30pm, at the Betsey. Look forward to seeing you there. In the mean time, here’s a poem from Other – which should be out in the US soon.

Small Screen Communion

iPod, phone
held close
and thumbed,
reflecting so dimly
on lichened branches
fingering the above,
are such small lights
on these paths
at night.

What possible guidance
could they offer?

Yet still
I look,
still we look,
so intently
at their ever-decreasing thinness
and ask of them
the same
as wafers
once gave.

© KB September 2009

There has been some interesting discussion around Steve Jobs’ unfortunate temporary withdrawal from Apple due to ill health. Jobs is perhaps unique in that he is a genuine figurehead – and as Apple is the world’s largest company, that’s important. If he goes, what will remain?

Andy Crouch quotes Jobs speaking in his Harvard Commencement address:

No one wants to die. Even people who want to go to heaven don’t want to die to get there. And yet death is the destination we all share. No one has ever escaped it. And that is as it should be, because death is very likely the single best invention of life. It’s life’s change agent; it clears out the old to make way for the new. Right now, the new is you. But someday, not too long from now, you will gradually become the old and be cleared away. Sorry to be so dramatic, but it’s quite true.

Out with the old and in with the new… the constant need for upgrades and the fear of becoming defunct. Perhaps, beyond the shiny new surfaces and beautifully minimal designs, Jobs has been tapping into something more fundamental about our existential angst: we buy because don’t want to die.

But what happens when Jobs himself dies? (though I obviously wish him a speedy return to full health) What will happen to the cult of Apple then? Because, we have to admit it, Apple has created a very secular cult. It is not just about functionality. Neither is it simply about form. It is about that logo, on those devices, and the many messages that that sends out, quietly, cooly. Crouch again:

The genius of Steve Jobs has been to persuade us, at least for a little while, that cold comfort is enough. The world—at least the part of the world in our laptop bags and our pockets, the devices that display our unique lives to others and reflect them to ourselves—will get better. This is the sense in which the tired old cliché of “the Apple faithful” and the “cult of the Mac” is true. It is a religion of hope in a hopeless world, hope that your ordinary and mortal life can be elegant and meaningful, even if it will soon be dated, dusty, and discarded like a 2001 iPod.

I wonder then if this is why Apple products are so beloved of the hipsters – because they (we?) more than anyone have rejected old religion, old meanings more vociferously, and, in this absence, ache more painfully for our lives to be significant and meaningful. Is this not why the emerging church has always run on OS X? Aren’t Mac-addicts just like the smug, unchangeable Christians we’ve all known and loved? Isn’t an Apple store a little… ecclesiastic?

I think there are some fascinating issues here around ideas of technology, philosophy, death and culture. So I’m thinking that it’s high time for an Apple on Apple. I’m currently booking some dates right now, so look forward to a deep engagement on the issues with a good panel of people.

(HT Paul for linking to the Crouch piece. | Related posts:  Apple: Selling Us Our Desires The SuiciPad: Expensive Machines Made By Cheap People)

Apple – the series of talks trying to think more deeply about technology – is back this Weds with the 9th event (7:30pm, The Betsey Trotwood, 56 Farringdon Road).

The title is ‘Digital Obesity’ and will be a panel discussion with Simon Jenkins of ShipOfFools, Gavin O’Carrol from the Digital Health Service and Vaux’s own Jenny Brown from the Awesome Web Co. In other words, it’s going to be fantastic.

I blogged a bit about the idea of Digital Obesity here and here and am convinced it’s an increasing problem: we just have far too much information coming in, far more than we can usefully use. So, just as excessive calorie intake doesn’t mean we have more energy and do more exercise, excessive information doesn’t end up with us doing more, or really even knowing more. We just get tired and bloated. And change channel. Again.

Another dimension I’ll be wanting to feed in on Weds is the alienating aspect of technology. I’ve just written a review of Nicolas Carr’s book The Shallows for Third Way, in which I write:

Carr summarises the co-evolution of our tools and ourselves when he writes that ‘when the carpenter takes his hammer into his hand, he can use that hand to do only what a hammer can do.’ While massively extending what we can do, ‘the price we pay to assume technology’s power is alienation.’

I think this is a fascinating insight. We are so very quick to extol the powers that technology gives us: the huge reach in communication, the massive increases in computational complexity, the ability to create new visual styles. But I think we have been very shy to admit the price that we have paid for these powers: the alienating effects of the tools we are using.

The parallels with diet are clear: our bodies have not had time to adjust to the huge changes in food consumption that we have experienced in the last 100 years. So we have got bigger and bigger. No one would want to return to the days of food scarcity, but we need to be open to the question of what unlimited consumption is doing to us.

In the same way, no one would sensibly suggest we abandon the digital tools that are now at our disposal. But what we absolutely must do is reflect more carefully on their use, and the fragmenting and alienating impact that these tools are going to have. And that’s exactly what Apple is about. So…you really should be there

Connected to the previous post about Gladwell’s article on ‘The Revolution Will Not Be Tweeted,’ I’m really excited about the next Apple event, which is coming up on 13th October. Dr Luke Bretherton will be leading a discussion on social media and social action, asking whether Facebook and Twitter have anything to add to community organising and political activism, or if the 1.4 million people who’ve joined the ‘Save Darfur’ group are wasting their time, and fooling themselves.

Details here. Good beer and food. You should be there!

Excellent piece by Malcolm Gladwell in the New Yorker, casting a sceptical eye over the optimistic view that social networks can and do lead to increased social action. His argument is not that they cannot have a good impact, but that the sort of impact they might have is very different from the hard work of political activism that brought about the end to segregation.

Old style activism depended on ‘strong ties’ – people who probably knew one another, and were very committed to a single cause, with their lives and values tied up in it. Whereas…

The kind of activism associated with social media isn’t like this at all. The platforms of social media are built around weak ties. Twitter is a way of following (or being followed by) people you may never have met. Facebook is a tool for efficiently managing your acquaintances, for keeping up with the people you would not otherwise be able to stay in touch with. That’s why you can have a thousand “friends” on Facebook, as you never could in real life.

But weak ties rarely lead to high-risk activism. Why? Because high-risk activism is hard. Gladwell notes the example of a bone-marrow campaign which went viral through social networks:

Donating bone marrow isn’t a trivial matter. But it doesn’t involve financial or personal risk; it doesn’t mean spending a summer being chased by armed men in pickup trucks. It doesn’t require that you confront socially entrenched norms and practices. In fact, it’s the kind of commitment that will bring only social acknowledgment and praise.

His conclusion is something we need to take careful note of:

Social networks are effective at increasing participation—by lessening the level of motivation that participation requires. Facebook activism succeeds not by motivating people to make a real sacrifice but by motivating them to do the things that people do when they are not motivated enough to make a real sacrifice.

For an community committed to change, to conversion – whatever that means – that’s an important lesson. Real sacrifice will never happen online.

This is actually going to be part of the focus of the next ‘Apple‘ event on 13th October: Dr Luke Bretherton looking at Social Media and Social Action. More details soon, but put the date in the diary – it’s going to be excellent.

The audio from the event – which was a panel consisting of me, Jonny, Maggi and Ian plus great comment from the floor – is available for free here.

The next Apple event is on 13th October and will feature Dr Luke Bretherton exploring whether social networks are leading to better engagement in social action. Excellent stuff.

I’m really excited about the discussions we’ll be having. Jonny Baker, Ian Mobsby, Maggi Dawn and I will be discussing as a panel to begin with, then opening to the floor for continued debate. I’m going on the radio on Wednesday morning to talk about it, and there has been some interest from other media, so do come and join us if you can! (Yes, Papa Benedict, that means you too )

I’ll have some copies of ‘Other’ on sale for a special price, and Maggi, Jonny and Ian will have wares too… Should be a really good evening! Full details here.

Apple, the series of events I’ve been organising with some others, is back for another three dates. The idea behind Apple is simple: to get theology to engage with technology and social process. We’ve covered diverse ground such as social networks, the Large Hadron Collider, grey ecology, Heidegger and gadgetry.

With this new series – more details to follow on the Apple blog – we’re going to be expanding a little and look at the wider idea of technologies as organisational tools. To kick this off, on 15th Sept I’m going to be debating institutional Christianity with Jonny Baker and Ian Mobsby (and others – tbc). This has sprung out of the big discussion that kicked off when I posited the question: ‘has what has emerged retreated?’ My concern is that the emerging church has slightly run for cover under the wing of the institutions recently – which have started offering new ways into ordination etc.

Jonny responded with a critique of the TAZ concept I put forward in Other, so I’ve asked him to come and discuss these issues with myself and Ian Mobsby – who’s ordained and leads the Moot emerging community, as well as advocating a New Monastic approach.

Given the recent scandals which have surrounded the Catholic church, and the continuing debates about schism in the Anglican communion, I think this is a very important debate which demands careful thought. Are institutions actually giving cover to practices which would be more immediately dealt with and condemned in the context of local community, or are they repositories of knowledge, protecting our faith from dilution? Moreover, is it possible to be both ‘at the centre and the edge?’

This should be a fascinating evening, with the usual good beer and food that our venue, The Betsey Trotwood, provide. Do your best to make it if you can!

Details:

7:30pm, 15th Sept

The Betsey Trotwood, 56 Farringdon Road