Firstly, I want to focus on my cellphone. When I went to college, I had just got my first cellphone. It was a Huawei’s Android smartphone, and I just used it for six month.

You can see it in the picture. It still can be used for calling or massaging, even playing some simply games. Because it cannot meet some requests for my normal life. I replaced it.

And in the first three years in my college life, I changed my cellphone every semester. So I have six cellphones in the first three years. And there are two reasons for this. One is that I was an incautious person. I dropped one cellphone in the lavatory, and I loss other one in a Chicago Airport. The other reason is that my father’s habit is changing his cellphone. So he would give me his older cellphones to me. That is why I changed my cellphone every semester. And I also think the new features and the improvement of the hardware is other reason to change cellphones. For example, I always used Android smartphones in the first three years, and these smartphones would be more and more lagging and crash because of updating Apps. So changing a smartphone is a way to solve this situation. About these no longer using cellphones, I just put these in my drawer. Because these still can be used for calling or messaging, if I lose my cellphone, I can reuse these before I buy a new cellphone.

And about other electrical device, I just updated it for just one case that it couldn’t work smoothly or it was broken. For example, before I got iPad mini, I had an iPad 1, iPad 2 and iPad 3. I just updated them when the older generation couldn’t meet the requirements of many Apps. And I just stored all these iPads in my drawer. But I guess it’s hard to reuse these. So I liked to store these no longer using devices in my drawer. And it’s my way to disposed of my devices. But sometimes I wanted to dispose these someplace where there could recycled. But it’s hard find an appropriate information. Because I would face some problems about the distance. The recycle place are not always located in my city, I need to spend money to ship my technological devices. But most of these still have functions. So I just keep all of these for my collection.

But after I saw a video[1] in my COM380 class, I changed my mind about how to dispose of my electrical device. People believe that the electrical device recycling company would recycle these device, but most of these company just sell this E-Waste to developing counties. It’s just a lie for us. The recycling companies are not responsible themselves. They hire women who are pregnant to deal with E-Waste. And the environment of a “recycling” place was polluted by E-Waste. Poor people just make a living by finding gold in E-Waste. After knowing about this, I think storing my older electrical devices in my drawer maybe is not a bad choice. Because these devices wouldn’t pollute the environment. But I just want the government to publish some law or measures to control these recycling companies.

With the development of technology, more and more electrical devices come out. But we should to rethink about how to deal with E-Waste. We need to protect our earth. So we need a method to recycle our electric devices. Maybe some people just throw their E-Waste in the garbage, but we can inform them through TV, newspaper or other way. For example, a paper posted near the garbage in my yard said, “Don’t throw electrical device in the garbage.” It is an effective way to forbid people from throwing E-Waste in the garbage. And I think if I shipped my no longer used devices to a recycle company, my devices would be sent to a developing country to pollute its environment. So I believe that keeping my old electrical device by myself is not bad way. And when I find a reliable method to recycle it, I will empty my drawer to recycle.

And another video also given me a chance to rethink about how to deal with the E-Waste problem.[2] It’s a TED lecture about recycling plastic by Mike Biddle. Using the tech way to figure out a tech question, which is best explanation for this lecture. He research about characters of all kinds of plastic, and knew how to figure out and recycle them. For E-Waste, maybe we can use the same way to deal with this problem. If we have the recycle technology which can match the every new generation of electrical devices. And the government should let people know where they can use this technology to recycle, which can better the situation of E-Waste.

After knowing much information about E-Waste, I also became more careful before I purchase a new electrical device. Because I would think about the impact on the environment. I will select environment-friendly devices. And I also will decrease the frequency for updating my devices, in order to help mitigate the E-Waste problem.

All in all, E-Waste is a big problem we face now. But we can break it down, just focus on ourselves. It will have important influence on this problem. We can reduce the frequency of updating our devices. Due to demand, companies will adjust their production. This is a way to reduce the problem at the source. Don’t throw E-Waste in the garbage, the incorrect way to dispose will pollute our environment. We must select the reliable way to recycle E-Waste. That is what I learned from my experience and what I learn from my COM380 course.

Just following these tips, and doing it for ourselves. Our earth will be more beautiful!

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PgbrPiUG0M

[2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RD07GkmM2fc

As is the case with many people today, I would say that my phone has become the premier example of my reliance on and reverence for my technology. From the moment I wake up in the morning until I go to sleep at night—and usually when I am asleep as well—my phone stays with me.

Interestingly, I use my phone almost exclusively for music/audiobooks or as a phone. Almost all my social media apps, like Facebook and Instagram, are tools for my social media-marketing job. Often, my friends will complain that I don’t update social media enough, or text back with any reliability.

The real significance of my relationship with my phone is as a tool for connecting with absent friends and family members. My boyfriend and I began our relationship by getting to know one another long distance, and we have developed a relationship that relies heavily on our phones. Our lunch dates, Facetime calls and constant stream of voicemails fill the gaps when we are unable to be in the same physical location.

My relationship with my boyfriend is indicative of my relationship to my phone since I got my first one. My first phone was a simple LG flip phone, and my parents only bought if for me because I was going away to boarding school and my parents wanted a reliable way to reach me at school. Throughout high school, and well into college I had “dumb” phones. I began to treat my phone with reverence, as it was my way to contact those that I loved no matter how far away they were from me. Often, I couldn’t understand the appeal of a smart phone because I had everything I needed in my “dumb” ones.

My switch to a smart phone was actually forced. Until I got an iPhone, all of my phones had been second-hand. Whenever my mom upgraded to a new phone I would get her old one (if I needed a new phone). When my second Alias 2 was stolen in the spring of my sophomore year of college, the only phone my mom had to give me was her Droid 2. Initially, I was annoyed by the touch screen and app store. However, I enjoyed the increased capacity for storing and playing music.

After I had accepted “smart” phones, I decided to switch to an iPhone because I liked the idea of consolidating my iPod with my phone. Now, my phone lives one my person. As gross as it might seem to some, it lives in a pocket in my bra—and it even stays there when I sleep. My attachment to it has gotten to the point where I have trouble functioning without it—which I realized when I cracked it’s screen last semester and had to rely on my computer to communicate with my parents and my boyfriend for two weeks.

Even my now defunct phones still hold some part of me hostage. I keep them, even though I know I could ostensibly pitch them at the recycling center at the entrance of any Best Buy. Some still have pictures or voicemails from years ago that were never transferred to my newer phones. One was just my favorite phone design that I ever had and I couldn’t bear to throw it out when I found out they had discontinued it in favor of a newer, sleeker version. I even like to pretend that if anything happened to my phone now, one of them could serve as a stand in until I was eligible for an upgrade on my current phone—which I have only done once. However, most have some defect, such as a broken End Button or inability to adjust the volume—which is why I upgraded in the first place. It’s difficult to part with my old technology on an emotional level, but I also don’t know how much I trust Best Buy or other recycling centers to dispose of them properly.

My family actually purged much of our older, defunct technology over the past year, so I am familiar with my city’s recycling center—the Shelby County Household Hazardous Waste facility. (You can only bring one electronic device per household per month.) I hadn’t really considered it until now, but all of the technology we recycled was “family” technology. Our old family computers, dating back to our first Gateway and one computer that only ran DOS. However, underneath a cabinet in the living room is a little repository for all our cameras, cell phones and other more “personal” electronics. It seems that it’s more difficult to part with these more personal items.

I’ve never really stopped to consider that my phones seem to conveniently “wear out” right around the time when my cell phone contract is up for renewal. In recent years, it seems that two years is the standard lifespan for a phone before daily wear and tear takes its toll. However, it is no accident that my iPhones need replacement just as the new version is released; rather it is planned obsolescence. According to The Economist, planned obsolescence is “a business strategy in which obsolescence…of a product is planned and built into it from its conception.”[i] The logic behind this strategy is that in the future consumers will purchase new products or services from the manufacturer as old products wear out. Many companies even go so far as to say this benefits the consumer, as the customer will stay up to date as the technology improves.

Apple, the progenitor of my various iPhones, iPods, and Mac Computers, has been continually cited as a perpetuator of planned obsolescence within the technology industry. Whether Apple maliciously searches for ways to have their products begin to deteriorate just as a newer model is released is unknown. However, Apple does engage in planned obsolescence as Brook Stevens originally envisioned it in their drive to instill “in the buyer the desire to own something a little newer, a little better, a little sooner than is necessary.”[ii]

With a total net income of $39.5 billion in 2014 and 416 retail stores in 13 countries as of September 28, 2013, Apple is a massively powerful corporation.[iii] Therefore, if Apple decided it had an economic stake in utilizing (technical) planned obsolescence, it approaches the monolithic status required to engage in planned obsolescence without being abandoned in favor of a cheaper or better-made alternative.

E-waste is becoming a major environmental problem, given that a staggering “20m-50m tonnes of “e-waste” is produced each year, most of which ends up in the developing world.”[iv] When e-waste is not recycled, the hazardous materials contained in them are released into areas surrounding the incinerators or the landfills where discarded technology eventually winds up. According to their corporate website, Apple has a strict e-waste policy that often ensures up to 90% of the materials in their products get reused in some form.[v] Apple’s e-waste policy has been somewhat problematic in the past, due to the wording of the policy that may have included a potential loophole for the exportation of e-waste to developing nations.[vi]   However, Apple now states that all e-waste will be handled in the region where it was collected. The voluntary nature of their recycling program means that Apple is not required to provide transparent documentation regarding their audits of their recycling partners. Maxwell and Miller in their book Greening the Media, caution against this type of corporate self-auditing as companies are able to capitalize on ‘green prosumption’ by saying they are “green” or “sustainable” without providing proof positive to the public.

In order to recycle Apple products, one can trade them in via mail and even redeem some resale value from the item.[vii] Additionally, Apple will take any brand of computer or monitor for free (max – 10 items and 70 lbs.) in the mail and take iPod trade-ins in store. Despite these efforts to recycle the e-waste we are creating, Apple—as well as other mobile phone companies—continually produces more e-waste at an alarming rate. According to Maxwell and Miller, people in the U.S. replace their phones at a rate of once per year and over 130 million phones are trashed in the U.S. alone per year. When Apple unveiled the new lighting charger with the iPhone 5, there was a new kind of e-waste problem associated with the obsolescence of accessories and the impetus to upgrade iPods or iPads in order to have all one’s Apple products be able to use the same charger and accessories after upgrading one’s phone.[viii] While Apple has made some strides by meeting the requirements of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal, planned obsolescence whether social or technical still plays a big role in the creation of—or elimination of—e-waste.

[i] Tim Hindle, “Idea: Planned Obsolescence,” The Economist, March 23, 2009, http://www.economist.com/node/13354332

[ii] Catherine Rampell, “Planned Obsolescence, as Myth or Reality,” The New York Times, October, 31, 2013, http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/planned-obsolescence-as-myth-or-reality/?_r=0

[iii] “Apple, Inc,” LexisNexis® Corporate Affiliations™. April 27, 2015. Date Accessed: 2015/05/11. www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic.

[iv] “How green is your Apple?” The Economist, August 25, 2006

[v] “Apple Recycles Responsibly,” Apple, Inc, https://www.apple.com/recycling/includes/recycles-responsibly.html

[vi] Jeff Bertolucci, “How green is Apple: Where does the e-waste go?” Macworld, April 21, 2009, http://www.macworld.com/article/1140122/greenapple3.html

[vii] “Apple’s Takeback Program,” Electronics TakeBack Coalition, http://www.electronicstakeback.com/how-to-recycle-electronics/manufacturer-takeback-programs/apples-takeback-program/

[viii] John Biggs, “Apple Is Creating An E-Waste Problem,” August 14, 2012, http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/14/apple-is-creating-an-e-waste-problem/

—

[1] Tim Hindle, “Idea: Planned Obsolescence,” The Economist, March 23, 2009, http://www.economist.com/node/13354332

[2] Catherine Rampell, “Planned Obsolescence, as Myth or Reality,” The New York Times, October, 31, 2013, http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/10/31/planned-obsolescence-as-myth-or-reality/?_r=0

[3] “Apple, Inc,” LexisNexis® Corporate Affiliations™. April 27, 2015. Date Accessed: 2015/05/11. www.lexisnexis.com/hottopics/lnacademic.

[4] “How green is your Apple?” The Economist, August 25, 2006

[5] “Apple Recycles Responsibly,” Apple, Inc, https://www.apple.com/recycling/includes/recycles-responsibly.html

[6] Jeff Bertolucci, “How green is Apple: Where does the e-waste go?” Macworld, April 21, 2009, http://www.macworld.com/article/1140122/greenapple3.html

[7] “Apple’s Takeback Program,” Electronics TakeBack Coalition, http://www.electronicstakeback.com/how-to-recycle-electronics/manufacturer-takeback-programs/apples-takeback-program/

[8] John Biggs, “Apple Is Creating An E-Waste Problem,” August 14, 2012, http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/14/apple-is-creating-an-e-waste-problem/

My first was an iPod classic that I got in 5th grade. Eventually the battery died and it was laid to rest in a drawer in my parents’ house. Earbud set number 1. Next came the MacBook for Christmas of 2006. In my junior year of college almost exactly nine years later, I finally upgraded to a friend’s used 2010 MacBook Pro. Somehow I’ve already lost track of the old laptop not even three months into my “new” computer, and all I have is the pair of earbuds from that era to show for it. First iPhone came in 2009, again with earbuds. I had been an avid Blackberry and then later Droid fan, but with all the other Apple products I had, it felt strange to not complete the set. I finally upgraded to an iPhone 4S in 2012 (the same year the 5 came out), and have stayed with it since, despite its shattered screen. That makes earbud set number 4. Then I started missing my iPod Classic from the good old days and, staying true to my uberloyal way with technology, got another Classic even though the only model available had a ridiculous amount of memory I could never use. It was lost at a swim meet circa 2013, and I’ve been contemplating another ever since. I just have the earbuds now. I suppose “EarPods” would be the appropriate terminology to use were I to buy a new Apple anything now.

I am currently at five going on six pairs of earbuds and it seems strange that with all the hell those earbuds were put through (tangled in backpacks, shoved in wet ears at swim meets, doubled as cat toys), they have lasted longer than the products they came with. For someone more enchanted by new than I am, the number of earbuds could double or triple. I think mine have stuck around so long because they are the only pieces of equipment that can transcend generations of iPhones or iPods and are still universally compatible. Even with this power though, they still sit alongside the chargers and docks that no longer are, adding to the technotrash clutter.

Apple had huge iPhone sales this past month alone with record earnings and took a massive portion of overall smartphone industry profits over 2014. While Apple still brought home serious dough, it may be forced to turn towards other types of software applications to continue the ability to boast such incredible profit margins. The plateau of iPad sales, for example, could be made up for by the emergence of Apple Pay. As Apple shifts towards decreased percentage of its profits originating in actual hardware, this could imply less of an incentive to find friendlier ways of disposing of outdated or broken products.

The economic stake in planning for hardware disposal remains, however. The biggest reason Apple would show a more ecofriendly and recycle-friendly side to its consumers may be its image. The key to Apple’s marketing strategy is simplicity. Both its products and advertising adhere to this method, and it is implied that the type of person they so strongly cater toward with their products would also be in favor of an ecofriendly way to dispose of their product once they are finished with it.

Refs:

DeMers, Jayson. “Here’s the Simple Secret To Apple’s Marketing Success.” Forbes. Forbes Magazine, 8 July 2014. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.

Warman, Matt. “World-Beating Profits – But What’s Next For Apple?; Tech Giant Is Planning Beyond The iPhone With Payments And Watches, Says Matt Warman.” The Daily Telegraph [London] 29 Jan. 2015. LexisNexis Academic. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.

Wolverton, Troy. “Apple’s iPhone Profits Leaves Rivals with Little but Table scraps.” San Jose Mercury News [San Jose] 9 Feb. 2015. LexisNexis Academic. Web. 19 Feb. 2015.

Since 1995, the year that I was born, as well as the year that my family purchased this Sony device, countless music players have been created, both by this company, as well as hundreds of other electronic manufacturers. The implementation of new technologies into the market has outdated our old unit. Although the sound system was such a pertinent part of our lives, more advanced sound systems (i.e., laptops, iPods, iPads, speakers, headphones) have replaced my family’s need for our now archaic stereo. Because newer innovations have served up the same entertainment, as did our old stereo player, changing from one device to another was not difficult for any member of my family. Moreover, our modern technologies being far more advanced, function without the need to purchase CDs or cassette tapes at a music store, and they play music with a much greater sound quality. We have actually marveled at the ease with which we have evolved electronically and musically, and the transition has been without any reservation.

Though I cannot remember the last time any person in my family, myself included, has used our Sony stereo system, the cassette and CD player still inhabit our den. What seemed like the perfect spot for our sound system at the time, placed atop our large television unit, now proves to be a waste of space. Today, this once-loved relic of a bygone era continues to reside in its original domain solely for show. No one has felt the need to change its location, most likely due to the sentimental value of the machine within our family. In fact, the very obvious location of our stereo system in an oft-used room appears to contribute to Turke’s “secret power,” as well. Despite the fact that we have long ago transitioned to modern modes of sound production and entertainment, it is ironic that we have never chosen to move our old system. We don’t use it, but subliminally, it surely resides in some intangible place.

So much of the wistfulness that we feel as we ogle the ancient box is derived from the countless merriments in which the music player was the main event. For each one of us, this obsolete technology is a source of unique as well as shared memories; the “secret power” is that it holds an innate ability to remind us of our past years, old friends, and fondest reminiscences.

Sony Corporation, though not originally referred to by this name, began as a much smaller establishment. In the year 1946, Sony was lead by one man located in Japan. After years of company growth, the Japanese enterprise has proven to have paved a path for countless other technological companies that currently thrive, as a result. According to the numerous articles discussing Sony’s net profit in the year that my particular stereo system was made, the corporation has achieved great success. Moreover, from 1994 to 1995, Sony stated to have a net profit growth of 50.4%. This same year, the technological corporation’s pretax increased by 4.8%. About twenty years later, Sony Corporation appears to have suffered significant profit depletion. In 2014, Sony faced a net loss of $1.1 billion. This is most likely due to technological competitors, the main one being Apple, that have outdone Sony’s products in a variety of ways.

Sony is currently aiming a restructuring plan that will maximize its’ future profits. The company’s target is $4.2 billion in annual profit by March of 2018. To achieve this goal, over the course of the past two years, Sony has decided to “ease away from its reliance on computers, televisions and mobile phones,” and rather, develop smaller-scale technologies. The depletion in Sony’s overall annual profits since 1995 appears to be a direct result of the change in demands of the public. Sony’s plan to restore multiple fields in the business are necessary in order for the company to thrive similarly to the way it did twenty years ago.

“Sony Profit Recovers in Third Quarter: Electronics Sales Strong, but Outlook Clouded by Movies.” Lexis Nexis. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.

“Sony Announces $1.1b Net Loss.” Chinadaily.com. Lexis Nexis, 7 Feb. 2014. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.

Mozur, Paul. “Sony Aims for Huge Leap in Profit.” Bits Sony Aims for Huge Leap in Profit Comments. The New York Times, 18 Feb. 2015. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.

On a different note, I know for a fact that the computer still functions, but it has so much information that there is no more space left on it. It is an old MacBookPro from around the year 2004. But at the time I was very glad to find out that my uncle was about to upgrade to the new MacBook. The one that he gave me was my first ever laptop; I was the lucky beneficiary of the relatively new piece of technology. I used it up until my sophomore year at university; I used it for everything. Sadly, it got to be so ancient and outdated that it began to glitch. I could no longer store my documents on it. It was time for a new laptop.

For fear of finding something excruciatingly embarrassing that one of my cronies could potentially use as blackmail, I am reluctant to open it. Now that it is closed, I want to keep it that way for a long time. I have a feeling that one day, when I’m 35 years-old, I’m going to finally open it and be very glad I waited. Right now feels too soon to rehash those old memories.

I am absolutely dependent on my computer. It has become an extension of who I am. As a filmmaker, all of my movies are on my computer. All of my editing progress is on my computer. All of my accounts for everything are on my computer. Furthermore, my emails keep me in touch with potential employers, friends, family, and pen pals. Thank goodness I have my own computer so that I can store all of my 50 or 60 usernames and passwords that belong to me. If I didn’t have my own laptop, I would certainly fail to remember my passwords and would certainly spend a disgusting amount of time trying to recover my various username and password combinations. My laptops get me by. They keep me on my feet. They hold my memories. They are a part of my identity.

I was always excited about new technologies but was hesitant to part with my older ones that I had become attached to. Each device holds memories that develop with its use, but the desire for new technologies overrides the fondness we have for the outdated ones. After a few years with my Walkman, I moved on from my CD player, and then to the new, chick iPod Nano. After only a few years, it was time for an upgrade. To make a ong story short, I went through four different versions of iPods within the next few years. Then, in 2013 I got my first iPhone and immediately even my newest iPod became obsolete. I could do everything on the new iPhone and had no further need for my other technologies.

Today, I am unsure if I could locate each of these music technologies that I used to use and love. All of my generations of music are now lying around my home somewhere in the bottom of a box. Each of these discarded items once seemed so appealing in its newness and ability to do more and more. In their book, Greening the Media, Richard Maxwell and Toby Miller discuss the “technological sublime” as a “quasi-sacred power,”[i] which draws consumers in with an attractive appearance and the promise of a better life.[ii] Modern technologies offer something newer and better, which wears off as soon as the next device comes out, yet society is addicted to the feeling of buying something new and life-changing. In The Digital Sublime, Vincent Mosco argues that people constantly give in to myth and hype surrounding new technologies because each new device comes a new promise of better communication, better connection and the ability to do more. We buy into it every time, no matter what the product.

The beginning of my consuming and upgrading music players was with the Walkman, a cassette tape player that was once a revolutionary product made by the Sony Corporation.

After being established with a different name in 1947 in Tokyo as a start up company, Sony Corporation was introduced to America in 1960 and began producing innovative new products. Sony was on the rise, creating products such as CD players, radios and a color television. In July of 1979, Sony made a stamp in music history by introducing the Walkman[iii]. Since the creation of this personal cassette player, Sony as well as other companies have introduced a myriad of music players to society, making this once revolutionary product seem ancient. Maxwell and Miller offer an explanation about why we are so quick to throw away devices once something new comes out:

…New technologies redefine the social and cultural relationships that earlier media helped shape… Old media cannot carry certain new content… they are displaced by new media delivering higher-potency versions of old content through new channels.[iv]

Today with abundance of new, high-tech products, older devices that were once popular are outdated and unused. The decline in popularity of the Walkman foreshadowed the overall decline in popularity and profitability of the Sony Corporation.

Despite Sony’s indisputably groundbreaking products in earlier years, the company is now struggling. In 2012, Sony experienced a loss of $540 billion in revenue from the past year. Their market value in 2012 was one ninth of Samsung electronics, and one thirteenth of Apple’s. In fact, they have not made a profit since 2008 because they had not had a hit product in years.[v] Sony tried to compete with the creation of Apple’s iPod, but has not made a competitive portable music product since the Walkman in 1979.[vi]

 [vii]

In an attempt to decrease spending and increase profit, Sony steered away from their electronics branch and tried to focus its efforts and money in their other ventures such as video games, movies and software. In February of 2014, Sony sold Vaio, Sony’s PC business, to Japan Industrial, which is a Japanese private-equity firm that buys units of larger Japanese companies. Sony’s spokes person said that the Vaio brand has a stronger presence in the business world in Japan.[viii] Investors and owners are making an effort to get Sony back on the competitive market and revive the once extremely profitable company.

Sony is just one example of a company struggling in the ever changing and modernizing media environment. Like me, the rest of the world will drop an older device for the newest gadget. My purchases reflect how devices and technology companies can go from being extremely relevant with hit products to becoming obsolete in a matter of years. This begs the question, what ultimately happens to these discarded items? They are either left abandoned or are disposed of. The outdated electronics branch of Sony is a contributor to the techno-trash that everyone has acquired over the years.

However, when someone purchases the newest device, they do not think about what will happen to their old one, but are instead caught up in excitement and hope for something that will change their lives. Greening the Media illuminates, “…that the tendency to regard each emergent medium as awe inspiring and world changing relies on recurring myths of technological power in the absence of acknowledging environmental and labor realities.”[ix] Society views the creation of new technologies in a distorted way. While they may allow us to do more, everyone is blind to the fact that technologies are material objects that harm the environment during their creation, use, and disposal. I now realize that I am no different in my thought process, and before writing this I never even considered what I should do with my old devices, such as my Walkman, CD player and old iPods.

Electronic waste has become a huge environmental issue. A study done in 2005 by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency showed that there were 1.9 million to 2.2 million tons of electronic waste discarded that year, with only 379,000 tons recycled, and the remaining 1.9 million tons put in landfills.[x] The electronic industry has a huge impact on the environment, and electronic companies are moving to make recycling programs to appease the consumer demand for better disposal of products.

In 2007, Sony partnered up with Waste Management and made an effort to boost electronic recycling by covering the recycling fees of their products. Sony and Waste Management hope that other companies will follow in Sony’s footsteps in promoting the importance of recycling. They hope that covering the cost of the recycling will give people more incentive to bring their old electronics to drop off locations.[xi] Between 2007 and 2011, Sony reported that their program had recycled over 50 million pounds of Sony products in the United States.[xii]

The Safety and Health department at Sony Electronics said, “We support the recycling of our products in the same respect we have when we create them, and our ultimate goal is to take back one pound of eWaste for every pound of product we make.”[xiii] Sony made a commitment to the U.S Environmental Protection Agency to promote environmentally sound management of electronic waste through recycling products.

In 2011, Sony announced that they made it even easier to recycle old or unwanted products on their website, www.sony.com/ecotrade. It is designed to help consumers find the best way to trade-in or recycle Sony products for credit towards new products. The website has a drop-off locator, which shows customers the nearest recycling center where they can bring their unwanted electronics. The website is easy to use, and asks for your Zip Code and the type of product you wish you drop off. To test the locator, I entered the Tulane University Zip Code, 70118 and selected “portable audio player” so that I could see where to recycle my Sony Walkman and CD player.

The site came up with multiple locations, the closest of which is in Houston, Texas about 313 miles away:

If a location is far away, the website claims that Sony will ship your item free to the drop-off location for products that they manufactured.[xiv] However, this makes recycling old devices less environmentally friendly because the shipping process produces gas and the box to ship the products in create waste as well. I called Sony’s customer service at: 1-(877)-865-7669 to ask about the recycling program and found that they would not cover the shipping cost of my Sony product to the drop-off in Houston. I inquired about where the items go after reaching the drop-off location, and was told that they go to another warehouse in Texas. However, my customer service representative was unable to get in contact with anyone involved in that warehouse to ask further questions.

It is unclear where Sony products are actually recycled. It is possible that they are recycled in that warehouse in Texas. However, it is known that in some cases, recycling is sent out of the country to be dealt with. According to Barbara Kyle, the national coordinator for the Electronics TakeBack Coalition about 50 to 80 percent of electronic waste that is brought to recyclers goes to China and other developing countries. She does say, however, that manufacturers themselves are more likely to have responsible practices[xv], so Sony’s recycling may be better than this outsourcing.

It is comforting to know that as consumers, we have options about what to do with our “techno-trash.” Companies have responded to demands about being environmentally friendly with programs for recycling their products. It is important that we recognize these options and utilize them, but stay objective and realize that these recycling processes may be different than we image. As long as technologies are surrounded by myths, we will continue upgrading and buying new devices. We must learn how to keep the environment safe as our society keeps modernizing, creating new products and adding the outdated castoffs to the ever-growing heap of techno-trash.

[i] Maxwell, R., & Miller, T. (2012). Greening the media. New York: Oxford University Press. (p. 4)

[ii] IBID (p. 22)

[iii] Sony Corporation Global Headquarters. (n.d.). Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/history.html

[iv] Maxwell, R., & Miller, T. (2012). Greening the media. New York: Oxford University Press. (p. 43)

[v] Tabuchi, Hiroko. (2012) “How Sony lost its place in the Sun; Drought of hit products and a lack of focus weigh on the electronics giant.” The International Herald Tribune. LexisNexis Academic. Web.

[vi] Zaun, Todd. “Sony Says Year’s Sales and Profit Will Miss Targets.” The New York Times. (2005). LexisNexis Academic. Web.

[vii] “Eclipsed by Apple.” (2014, July 12). Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.economist.com/news/business/21606845-electronics-companies-japan-are-starting-turn-themselves-around-they-are-shadow

[viii] Edwards, Cliff and Yasu, Mariko. “Sony Said in Talk to Sell Japan PC Unit to Investor Group.” Bloomberg Business. (February 2014). http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-04/sony-said-holding-talks-to-sell-japan-pc-unit-to-investor-group

[ix] Maxwell, R., & Miller, T. (2012). Greening the media. New York: Oxford University Press. (p. 43)

[x] Richgels, Jeff. “Sony to Cover Recycling Fees.” The Capital Times. (2007). LexisNexis Academic. Web.

[xi] IBID

[xii] “Sony Rolls Out New Trade-In & Recycling Web Site.” India Retail News. (2011). LexisNexis Academic. Web.

[xiii] IBID

[xiv] IBID

[xv] Munoz, Sarah. “Electronics Recycling Starting to Heat Up; Manufacturers, Retailers Beginning to Provide Ways to Dispose of Old Gadgets.” The Wall Street Journal. (2008). LexisNexis Academic. Web.

WORKS CITED

Belson, Ken. “Sony Says Profit Tumbled 25% From a Year Ago.” The New York Times. (October 24, 3003). LexisNexis Academic. Web.

Eclipsed by Apple. (2014, July 12). Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.economist.com/news/business/21606845-electronics-companies-japan-are-starting-turn-themselves-around-they-are-shadow

Edwards, Cliff and Yasu, Mariko. “Sony Said in Talk to Sell Japan PC Unit to Investor Group.” Bloomberg Business. (February 2014). Retrieved March 10, 2015 from http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-02-04/sony-said-holding-talks-to-sell-japan-pc-unit-to-investor-group

Maxwell, R., & Miller, T. (2012). Greening the media. New York: Oxford University Press.

Mosco, V. (2004). The digital sublime myth, power, and cyberspace. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.

Sony Corporation Global Headquarters. (n.d.). Retrieved March 10, 2015, from http://www.sony.net/SonyInfo/CorporateInfo/History/history.html

Tabuchi, Hiroko. (2012) “How Sony lost its place in the Sun; Drought of hit products and a lack of focus weigh on the electronics giant.” The International Herald Tribune. LexisNexis Academic. Web.

Zaun, Todd. “Sony Says Year’s Sales and Profit Will Miss Targets.” The New York Times. (January 21, 2005 Friday). LexisNexis Academic. Web.

Each night, we would gather by the TV and while my mother would casually sit down and begin to eat her meal, my father and I could feel each other’s eyes scanning the room for that big grey remote control. It was a nightly competition; whoever could find it first had all the power in the situation, that is to say the choice of what we were going to watch. I always preferred cable to DVDs, whereas my dad usually had a movie already in mind for us to watch. Whoever found the remote first, however, almost always had the privilege of choosing what we were all going to watch. This is when I was older, however, because when I was younger than say 10 years old, the remote was always something that belonged to my father. Once I got a bit older however, he made room for me to enter into the game of hide-and-seek. There were certain nights when I cheated (and hid the remote beforehand) and others where I am sure he did as well. Regardless, as Turkle discusses, holding this almost identical remote in my hands once again brought back swarms of memories of these family dinners that always meant so much to me yet I had seemed to forget about over time. This is the “special” quality of things or objects; as put by Turkle, the intense emotional attachment to them resulting from the fact that “we fall in love with objects that put us in touch with these ideas.”

The picture I uploaded includes the SANYO remote that plays a lead role in my childhood story sitting beside the Apple TV remote currently used by my roommates and I. It is interesting to see the sheer size difference between the two, but the emotions that they carry are similar in several ways. In the same way my father and I used to fight over the SANYO remote, my roommates and I have developed a similar dynamic surrounding the Apple TV remote. Whoever finds it first (which is even more of a challenge due to its size and tendency to disappear), gets to choose what we watch. This is something we engage in almost every day, but that I would never have thought to connect back to my childhood and my father had I not come across the SANYO remote.

The company which manufactured the remote control that I found in my house is called “SANYO”, and is a Sydney-based technology firm that has seen huge declines in profits over the past couple of decades. According to Chris Jenkins , SANYO has recently cut more than 14,000 jobs from its world-wide companies. The company had also planned to closed down 20 percent of its factories in Japan. This is a clear indication that the company has suffered an economic downturn. This article claims that the decline in profits stem from major competition in digital cameras, an item which is also quickly becoming obsolete (with the clarity of the camera on the iPhone 6, for example). However, many sources attribute the gain of zero net profit to the rapid rise of the Yen. Even after selling their cellphone business to Kyocera Corp. in 2008, Sanyo would have “fallen into the red” so to speak. This term is used in business to indicate when a business/company has fallen so far into debt that they cannot keep track of how much money they owe, for example. In struggling to avoid a shut-down, SANYO has cut off ties with fourteen of its “debt-ridden affiliates” (Bloomberg,1997). All of this information previously discussed is that which I have extracted from articles written from the years 1997-2006. It was very difficult to find any relevant articles regarding SANYO profit and sales in the year 2014, which further supports the notion of its obsolescence. Upon locating an article written in 2014 through Lexis Nexis by GlobalData, I discovered that Panasonic Corporation (a much more well-known company) has acquired 50.19% of SANYO’s shares (GlobalData Ltd., 2014). This fact illustrates the necessity for SANYO to sell its shares in order to survive, and perhaps attempt to jump-start new innovations, although at this point the chances of their revival seems unlikely.

Works Cited:
Analysts see profit potential in Sanyo; AROUND ASIA’S MARKETS; BUSINESS ASIA by Bloomberg
The International Herald Tribune, June 7, 2006 Wednesday, FINANCE; Pg. 23, 578 words, Wes Goodman
Sanyo slashes 14,000 jobs
The Australian, July 6, 2005 Wednesday All-round Country Edition, FINANCE; Pg. 24, 414 words, Chris Jenkins

Sanyo to cut operating profit forecast by 40 percent; see no net profit
Kyodo News International (Tokyo, Japan), January 10, 2009 Saturday, BUSINESS AND FINANCIAL NEWS, 314 words, Kyodo News International, Tokyo

For my high school graduation gift, I got a new laptop. The realization that I must get rid of my old, trusty computer was a scary one. Yes, all I did was complain about how slow it was, but my computer had been with me through so much, it almost felt like a part of me. It had begun to symbolize the future. As a young girl being able to type up documents felt grown up, and as I became older it transformed into the tool that would help me start the rest of my life, college essays. At the same time, I understood that my laptop had done its job and was ready to retire.

One thing that never crossed my mind is what would happen to my old laptop once it had been replaced by a newer, shinier version. And the answer is simple, nothing. It still sits dormant in my room waiting for someone to use it. I keep it in case of an emergency, but in all actuality, I am not even sure if it would even turn on at this point.

I know that soon I will have to find a way of disposing my old laptop, but I have no idea how. In high school, I volunteered at an organization that collected old technology, fixed what was broken, and then donated the gadgets to families in need. But, for the life of me, I cannot remember the name of the organization. After spending over thirty minutes on Google trying to find the organization, I have come to the conclusion that it no longer exists. I did find a few other places to drop off old technologies in my hometown, Houston.

The best option for technology donations in Houston is Goodwill or Compucycle. These donation centers, though not centrally located, accept items from PCs, servers, laptops, and game consuls to old cell phones, PDAs, tape drives, and cords. From my research, it seems as if donating my laptop would be the best way of disposing it. It would allow someone else to squeeze a few more good years out of it. But what happens after that is a question that has been running through my head nonstop. Although I do not know where my laptop will end up, I can only hope that what is now my beautiful machine of memories will not end up as pollution in a third world country.

My old laptop is an Apple Product. Apple is one of the largest technology distributer’s in the nation and has around 92,600 employees. The company was founded in 1976 by Steve Jobs and is now headquartered in Cupertino, Ca. The company mainly produces personal computers, portable digital music players, and mobile communication devices. While reviewing the list of products that Apple makes its crazy to see the variety of different technologies the company encompasses. It makes everything from iTunes (music listening service) to fonts to software and telecom technologies. The company has so many different products people could subsist solely on Apple and not lack for anything. In 2014, Apple made $182,795,000,000 in sales and had a net income of $39,510,000,000 (Corporate Affiliations 1). Even though Apple has so many resources available to them its sad to learn that recycling/disposal of products is not a higher priority. On its website, there is a page that walks users through the processing of sending back reusable products. Their website boasts that Apple meets the requirements of the Basel Convention on the Control of Transboundary Movements of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal. The site also says that Apple recycles “key components” of their products, but fails to mention what happens to the material that cannot be reused in new products? Another interesting part of Apple’s website is the list of unaffiliated places to recycle in both American and the rest of the world. But, in the United States section, Apple only give places to recycle in 14 out of the 50 states. Clearly Apple is aware that technology recycling is an important part of their industry, but there is still much work that must go into making disposal of technology more common and accessible.

Sources

“Apple – Recycling Program for IPod and Mobile Phones.” Apple – Recycling Program for IPod and Mobile Phones. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Feb. 2015.         <https://www.apple.com/recycling/ipod-cell-phone/>.

LexisNexis® Corporate Affiliations™. (February 9, 2015): LexisNexis Academic. Web.            Date Accessed: 2015/02/19.

Getting an iPod opened up a whole new chapter in my life– an era of musical discovery. To me, the secret power of the iPod was the power to discover. Now that I had this small, portable thing that would hold my music, I could search the Internet for new bands and purchase the music I found with a click of a button. I no longer had to pester my mom to drive me to the nearest record store (a now foreign concept!) to pick up a CD, but rather could just get on the computer and click to purchase whatever my heart desired, even if just one song! While some people may look at this device and just see an iPod, I look at it and see the beginning of a new chapter in my life, one that I still am in now. It was the first time I really began to understand and appreciate music and culture. I loaded this thing up with everything from Ciara to The Phantom of the Opera songs.

Sadly, as with all technologies, the time came when I had to give up my cool, blue iPod Mini. After a bit of time (I would say around 3-4 years) the battery stopped holding a charge, and I was forced to upgrade. At this point, I had already had the battery replaced once under my handy protection plan, and didn’t want to go through the hassle of doing it again. For my next birthday, I once again found myself asking for an iPod. At this point, it had become such an integral part of my life that I could not imagine living without it, and therefore decided to go through with the replacement. At this point, the “hot model” was the iPod Video, recently rebranded as the iPod Classic. It boasted more storage and the ability to play video. Although I didn’t need most of the features on it (I still do miss my Mini), I went for the purchase. Against all odds, I was able to keep this iPod working for the next few years, up until I got my first iPhone in 2009. While it was hard to part with, it did find a good home with my mom, who used it after my departure. Shockingly, unlike most Apple products, this one did not fall to the curse of planned obsolescence. While I did have to replace the battery after exactly two years (which I never gave much thought to until now), the device itself kept on working for many years after.

As I grew up (and, sadly, grew out of my Mini), I still found myself relying on my iPod and the entire iTunes system in general. Now, I could not imagine life without it. Whenever I travel back home, go to the gym, or even drive in my car, I find myself using my iPod. It allows me to be constantly entertained, and prepared for whatever musical situation I may find myself in. I have been loyal to Apple music products ever since, and am now on my second iPhone and 5^th total device. I still, however, think about my Mini and all of the joy it brought me. It reminds me of a great time in my early teenage years, and always will have a special place with me. But, the question still remained, if I didn’t want to keep this, where do I recycle it? Who profits from my iPod, and would they want to recycle it?

As it turns out, a little tech giant called Apple, who has been rolling out the devices for over a decade, created my beloved iPod. While the company recently discontinued their “Classic” iPod model, which featured a click wheel and a non-touch screen, their profits are still skyrocketing. In my research, I found a document by a company called Hoover’s, which keeps records of major companies’ financial statements. As of 2014, Apple was number 5 on the Fortune 500 ranking, racking up $65.2 million dollars in the United States in that year alone. In this time, however, the sales of iPods went down almost 50%, but the company was still able to make a large profit off of them.

The majority of Apple’s sales, however, come from the iPhone, which can be seen as a fancier and more alluring version of the iPod. iPhones have taken over the market once occupied by iPods, due to the fact that they can play music as well as a variety of other features. iPhones racked up $101.9 million dollars for Apple worldwide in 2014, which is quite a bit more than the $2.2 million coming from iPods.

Overall, Apple controls much of the overall digital market. Products such as the iPhone, iPad, and MacBook are dominating the playing field, and generating a huge amount of revenue for Apple. In order to keep up with the demands of their customers, and to ensure that people continue to buy the products they put forward, I believe that it is important for Apple to have some sort of recycling strategy in place. It turns out, this belief is correct.

Apple rolled out a recycling program way back in 2005, due to complaints from consumers. The program promised a discount towards a new Apple device with a trade in of the old one. According to a news release (published in 2005), the recycling program “emphasized that any hazardous material would not be shipped overseas for processing.” This, however, was 10 years ago. The press release also did not specify where the products would be recycled, only that they could be brought to a store and shipped away. So, has the process changed in the past 10 years?

Now, when you Google “Apple product recycling,” there are a multitude of sites that appear. Apple’s recycling program is one of the first hits, and much like the 2005 initiative all the consumer needs to do is bring (or send) in their device and they will receive credit towards a new one. Online, consumers click on which product they are trading—iPhone, iPad, or Mac. When selecting iPhone or iPad, you are brought to the page of a company called Brightstar Corp. For Macs, the recycling is done by PowerOn recycling. So, who are these companies? Where do the products go once they are sent in to the great recycling unknown?

Brightstar Corp. is a telecommunications company that provides wireless services and products around the world. In addition to this, they also offer trade in and recycling services for companies like Apple. According to their website, Brightstar is able to resell 95% and then “responsibly recycle” the remaining 5%. This is still pretty ambiguous. Searching where the products go via Google only leads to pages where the majority of people are complaining that they did not get the value that they expected. People were outraged with the money they were getting back, but not one questioned where their phones were actually going?

Next, I looked into PowerOn. Unlike Brightstar, PowerOn only focuses on recycling and repurposing electronics. Their website boast the “environmentally friendly” nature of the company, but once again does not say where the products are going once they are sent in.

The agreement that Apple has with its recycling companies provides a bit more insight into what happens to the products. Apple requires that any usable material is repurposed and made into something that could be used for future production. Nothing can be contracted to third parties, and nothing can be shipped outside of the U.S. without the written consent of Apple. The company must submit a report back to Apple upon completion.

Overall, the process of recycling is pretty ambiguous. As Maxwell and Miller discuss, a majority of the burden is put on the consumers. Apple makes the consumer return the product to the site, and does not make the whole process clear. They entice consumers with a cash discount, but do not reveal exactly where the recycled goods are going. The third party recyclers do an even worse job of revealing where things go, opting for ambiguous terms. This makes the process of recycling tech very murky and unclear.

The reason I wanted that specific Motorola Razr was because it was the hip phone to have at the time. All the kids in my class wanted one, so naturally I had to have it. However as I got older, so did the coolness of my Razr. Influxes of upgraded and high tech phones were hitting the markets, and everyone wanted the next best thing. My next cell phone was the LG Envy, which I got two years later in 7^th grade. Although they were only two years apart, the look of the devices was distinctively different. The Envy opened up from the side to expose a keyboard, making texting far easier compared to its flip phone counterpart.

By 9^th grade I had the Blackberry. It became the biggest deal to have one because everyone in my school used Blackberry Messenger (BBM) to communicate rather than texting. The times and the technologies were changing, and I always had to keep up with them.

I used various versions of the Blackberry throughout high school until my senior year, when I got the holy grail of modern technology, the iPhone. My first iPhone was an iPhone 4s, and I was so happy to hop on the Apple bandwagon. Last year I got the iPhone 5s, and I’ve used it ever since. I have been very happy with all my cell phones throughout the years at the time of their use, but I am by far most obsessed with my iPhone because it is like a portable computer that you carry around with you 24/7.

I never really considered what had happened to my old mobile devices, the ones I once cherished so dearly. When you think about what a cell phone is used for, to communicate, my hot pink razor should still be perfectly fine for people to use today. However, due to planned obsolescence, the desire for consumers to buy something simply because it is better and newer, my Razor was thrown away and disregarded after a year or two of using it. It has now come to my attention how wasteful I have been with my products despite the fact that they were perfectly functional. Most of my old cell phones sit in an old bin in my attic, or used as a toy for my little sisters to play with.

The wastefulness of technology that our culture has become so prone to is more detrimental then most believe it to be. While the cell phones of my past sit around my house collecting dust, I could still be using them today if I had taken better care of them or not bought into the desire of the “next best thing.”

One of my most outdated obsolete devices is the Razr cellphone. The phone was created by Motorola as part of their 4LTR line in July 2003, and was released in the market in 2004.

Compared to where the company was when I first got my Razr in 2005, its cell phone division is struggling. Unlike 10 years ago when the sleek flip phone was fashionable and in high demand, today the company has to compete with iPhones and other smartphones.

As of 2011, the company split into two firms, Motorola Mobility, which covers handsets and set-top boxes, and Motorola Solutions Inc., which sell police radios and barcode scanners to government and business customers. Google purchased the company for $12.5 million dollars in 2011, where they helped launch Moto X, Motorola’s first smart phone (The Telegraph 2013).

Only three years later Google sold it to China’s Lenovo for less than $3 billion dollars. According to Google’s CEO Larry Page this decision was because “The smartphone market is super competitive, and to thrive it helps to be all in when it comes to making mobile devices.” (Forbes 2014). However the purchase was not entirely advantageous because as of May 1, 2014, the profits of the company fell 8.7% percent from 2013 (Marketwatch 2014).

The history of Motorola from the birth of the Razr to today shows how changing modern technology is, and how consumers constantly want the next best thing. The disposal of the Razr and the Motorola cellphone division clearly hurt the company’s profits over time.

With the growing number of technological devices being thrown away or covered with dust in an attic somewhere, there has been an increase in environmentally damaging e-waste. The public has become more and more aware of the dangers of discarded electronic waste and Motorola has taken note of the public’s concern for the environment.

As of 2009, Motorola announced it was offering a free take back and recycling program for all of its enterprise mobility equipment. This program allows companies and users to responsibly dispose of electronics once their use has expired, rather than allowing them to contribute to an unhealthy planet.

Takeback is free for companies, and the program accepts a wide variety of Motorola-branded equipment from radios to desktop computers to cell phones, as well as non-Motorola products. Motorola has also set up takeback bins in service centers and retail outlets all over the world, expanding the companies recycling projects.

The steps to return a cellular device or other electronics are made very simple. A user simply has to download a postage label from the Motorola website, mail their packaged device to the headquarters, and it will then be refurbished for resale or recycled.

I think that this push towards recycling technology is a smart move on Motorola’s part. They appear to be very eco-friendly which is a good marketing tool for gaining the acceptance of the public. But that is exactly the problem. Some might argue that this corporate support for environmentalism is actually masking the branding opportunities for retailers and advertisers. This is referred to as the green commodity discourse, which promotes the fusion of environmentalism and the growth of profits and pleasure. Motorola’s effort to recycle e-waste makes the company looks reliable and ecofriendly, a very good business move.

Even if these recent programs developed by corporate technology companies are created with the idea of profit rather than environmentalism, I still think they are putting us in the right direction. By recycling their products or refurbishing them for resale, Motorola is making money while at the same time creating less damage to the environment: it is a win-win situation.

Works Cited

“Moto X: A New Start for Motorola?” By Laura Leichtfried, The Telegraph August 1, 2013

“Google Profits Billions With Motorola Sale to Lenovo, Keeps Patents” By Jean Baptiste Su, Forbes January 26, 2014

“Motorola Solutions Profit, Sales Drop; Project Revenue Decline” By MarketWatch May 1, 2014

“Greening The Media” By Richard Maxwell and Toby Miller. Oxford University Press 2012

“Motorola Expands E-Waste Takeback As Awareness Problem Grows” By Greener Computing Staff, Green Biz November 25, 2009