# Samsung admits its phones may contain tin from area mined by children - Apple make no comment



## editor (Apr 25, 2013)

Good work by FoE in nailing Samsung down to this deeply unsavoury practice. Let's hope they remain true to their word and start making changes fast.

I assume loads of other electronics firms are involved in this too, but it's a shame Apple hasn't come clean about its own supply chain yet. 


> Mobile phone company Samsung has admitted to using tin sourced from Indonesia's controversial Bangka Island, where an investigation last year by the Guardian and environmental charity Friends of the Earth (FoE)found that unregulated tin mining depends on child labour, wrecks the environment and kills an estimated 150 miners every year.
> 
> The admission from the world's best-selling smartphone manufacturer follows intense pressure from FoE and 15,000 concerned consumers who had contacted Samsung, demanding the company investigate the human and environmental costs of its tin sourcing.
> In an email sent to the charity and its customers, Samsung said: "While we do not have a direct relationship with tin suppliers from Bangka Island, we do know that some of the tin that we use for manufacturing our products does originate from this area."
> ...


http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/apr/25/samsung-tin-mines-indonesia-child-labour


----------



## kittyP (Apr 25, 2013)

I've only just got my Galaxy S3


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 25, 2013)

kittyP said:


> I've only just got my Galaxy S3


You'll have to treasure it forever in memory of the children who died so you could have a smart phone


----------



## kittyP (Apr 25, 2013)

Pickman's model said:
			
		

> You'll have to treasure it forever in memory of the children who died so you could have a smart phone



I do like it a lot and have been singing it's praises if that counts?


----------



## Belushi (Apr 25, 2013)

What happened traditional British phones made with tin mined by Cornishmen


----------



## editor (Apr 25, 2013)

Pickman's model said:


> You'll have to treasure it forever in memory of the children who died so you could have a smart phone


I imagine there's much the same kind of story for the computer you're typing away on.


----------



## DotCommunist (Apr 25, 2013)

I imagine apple hasn't commented because it gets its tin from well paid, well unionised mines where the workers all get free kittens and live till they are 110.


----------



## editor (Apr 25, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> I imagine apple hasn't commented because it gets its tin from well paid, well unionised mines where the workers all get free kittens and live till they are 110.


*high fives


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 25, 2013)

editor said:


> I imagine there's much the same kind of story for the computer you're typing away on.


I imagine so. And I will care for it till it falls apart.


----------



## Pickman's model (Apr 25, 2013)

Belushi said:


> What happened traditional British phones made with tin mined by Cornishmen


The heavy brick phones of the 80s with a talktime of 5 minutes?


----------



## editor (Sep 24, 2013)

And here's how shifty Apple have acted over this issue:



> *Why is Apple so shifty about how it makes the iPhone?*
> 
> The question was straightforward: does Apple buy tin from Bangka Island? The wriggling is almost comical
> 
> ...


http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/23/apple-shifty-about-making-iphone


----------



## purves grundy (Sep 24, 2013)

_Sincere apologies for the derail:_

I was in South Sumatera, near Pl. Bangka, a few years ago and learned that Bangka is where Gen. Suharto internally exiled a good number of 'communists' during the 60s. Some still alive, apparently, and still not allowed to leave. Then when I was further north in Medan, I met an old communist who'd escaped the purges. He walked pretty much the entire length of Sumatera, mostly through forest, over some years during the 60s / 70s until he settled in Medan, where he now drives a motorcycle taxi. Or he did when I met him, he was getting on a bit, and that must've been ten years ago. 

As you were.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Sep 24, 2013)

If Samsung is willing to admit to using tin potentially mined in Bangka then Apple must go along with this as their A6 chip is made in a Samsung factory. For that matter they also make the new A7 chip for the latest updated iPhones. (source Arstechnica.com)


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

The story is about about samsung.... but of course apple are the root of all evil so lets overlook samsung and just focus on apple for the near future shall we?


----------



## editor (Sep 24, 2013)

sim667 said:


> The story is about about samsung.... but of course apple are the root of all evil so lets overlook samsung and just focus on apple for the near future shall we?


Did you actually read the Guardian article above?  The "story" involves Apple every bit as much as Samsung, except Apple are rather disgracefully valuing their PR over anything else and tying to spin their way out of admitting anything.


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

But the point is they know samsung do, but not whether apple do.

The OP skims straight over samsung, like they're just a by-line to the story or not. Its the post I take exception to, not the story.


----------



## editor (Sep 24, 2013)

sim667 said:


> But the point is they know samsung do, but not whether apple do.
> 
> The OP skims straight over samsung, like they're just a by-line to the story or not.


Poor old Apple, eh?

Samsung have admitted to their dodgy tin sourcing so that means progress can be made. By refusing to even admit to using the stuff*, Apple is _actively_ preventing progress. And that is truly shameful.

*which it would appear that they do


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

editor said:


> Poor old Apple, eh?
> 
> Samsung have admitted to their dodgy tin sourcing so that means progress can be made. By refusing to even admit to using the stuff*, Apple is _actively_ preventing progress. And that is truly shameful.
> 
> *which it would appear that they do


 
Samsung have never made any progress over their arms manufacturing (i.e. stopping), so there's little of or no evidence they'll do fuck all about their dodgy suppliers either.

Apple may be actively preventing progress if they're have tin supplied from the same place, but where's the evidence for that..... So why doesn't the OP include all the electonrics firms that haven't admitted their supply chain backgrounds instead of using apple as the example.


----------



## editor (Sep 24, 2013)

sim667 said:


> Samsung have never made any progress over their arms manufacturing (i.e. stopping), so there's little of or no evidence they'll do fuck all about their dodgy suppliers either.
> 
> Apple may be actively preventing progress if they're have tin supplied from the same place, but where's the evidence for that..... So why doesn't the OP include all the electonrics firms that haven't admitted their supply chain backgrounds instead of using apple as the example.


Maybe it's because - you know - Apple are the biggest, the richest, the coolest and are the company raking in the most $$$ out of all this that they should be seen to be leading by example rather than acting like deceitful dicks?


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

editor said:


> Maybe it's because - you know - Apple are the biggest, the richest, the coolest and are the company raking in the most $$$ out of all this that they should be seen to be leading by example rather than acting like deceitful dicks?


 
Yeah but I think when you're comparing a companies one of which makes desirable gadgets but won't reveal its supply sources and one of which makes desirable gadget which do reveals its supply source, but then additionally makes self propelled artillery and fighter jets, taking moral high ground with the latter seems a bit silly.

It depends on what your priorities are though I guess..... Personally I'd rather not hold up a company that manfactures items for indiscriminate killing as a shining example of industry leadership in fair sourcing.

Im not arguing that I would like to know about apples sourcing, and for them to sort it out, I think all tech companies should..... I just find the two companies that are being compared a little ironic.


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

The post also doesn't link to this article which states


> Apple said in a statement: "Recent concerns about the illegal mining of tin from this region prompted Apple to lead a fact-finding visit to learn more."
> The Californian-based company will work with the Electronic Industry Citizenship Coalition (EICC) and is funding a new study into tin mining in the Bangka Island region so it "can better understand the situation".


 
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/jul/12/apple-tin-mining-bangka-island-iphone


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 24, 2013)

Now, why would it need to do that I wonder. Why would it need to better understand the situation?


----------



## editor (Sep 24, 2013)

sim667 said:


> Yeah but I think when you're comparing a companies one of which makes desirable gadgets but won't reveal its supply sources and one of which makes desirable gadget which do reveals its supply source, but then additionally makes self propelled artillery and fighter jets, taking moral high ground with the latter seems a bit silly.


All of which is utterly irrelevant to this particular issue. No one is making any claims for Samsung's morality (see my OP) but you sure look like you're trying to skate over Apple's disreputable behaviour here.


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

editor said:


> All of which is utterly irrelevant to this particular issue. No one is making any claims for Samsung's morality (see my OP) but you sure look like you're trying to skate over Apple's disreputable behaviour here.


 
How is it irrelevant? I think its totally relevant to argue you shouldnt compare the two companies letting samsung take a moral high ground, when actually samsung should hang their head in shame at the products they manufacture, of which never get mentioned on this forum, when comparitively there's a thread at least once or twice a week banging on about apple.

Not trying to skate over it, of course they've got responsibilities, they publish a yearly supplier responsibility report to try and address supplies, labour etc...

But the OP ignores every other tech company, which is pretty consistent with other threads about apple that crop up in this tech section.... it gets tiresome to say the least.


----------



## editor (Sep 24, 2013)

sim667 said:


> How is it irrelevant? I think its totally relevant to argue you shouldnt compare the two companies letting samsung take a moral high ground, when actually samsung should hang their head in shame at the products they manufacture, of which never get mentioned on this forum, when comparitively there's a thread at least once or twice a week banging on about apple.


How on earth is Samsung taking the "high moral ground" here? 

And why do you keep ignoring today's piece, which specifically mentions several tech companies, but finds only one which refuses to admit to using the tin. And that company is Apple.

_"Friends of the Earth and its Indonesian counterpart, Walhi, which have documented this catastrophe, are not calling for an end to tin-mining on Bangka and Belitung: they recognise that it supports many people who would not find work elsewhere. What they want is transparency on the part of the companies buying the tin extracted there, leading to an agreement to reduce the impacts and protect the people and the wildlife. Without transparency there's no accountability; without accountability there's no prospect of improvement.

So they approached the world's biggest smartphone manufacturers, asking whether they are using tin from Bangka. All but one of the big brands fessed up. Samsung, Philips, Nokia, Sony, BlackBerry, Motorola and LG admit to buying (or probably buying) tin from the island through intermediaries, and have pledged to help address the mess. *One company refuses to talk."
*_
And it's not like they're not aware of the importance of the issue: 


> Mobilised by Friends of the Earth, 25,000 people have now written to the company to ask whether it is buying tin from the ecological disaster zone in Indonesia. The answer has been a resounding "we're not telling you".



http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/sep/23/apple-shifty-about-making-iphone


----------



## elbows (Sep 24, 2013)

There is nothing wrong with using Apples high profile to draw attention to issues. Especially as their particular flavour of PR invites scorn.

What I find disturbing upon closer inspection is that the PR strategies of the organisations who seek to expose this stuff also leave an unusual taste in my mouth. This forces me to factor something else into the equation; the idea that rather than being an exceptionally bad offender, what fuels these spats is Apples desire to maintain control of how they respond to the issues raised, and stubbornly refuse to play the PR tune the NGOs demand.

Whether this matters really comes down to whether you believe the commitments the likes of Friends of the Earth extract from manufacturers who play along with their campaign mean any more than Apples version of commitment to the issues. Since the same capitalist and consumer forces apply to both cases, I anticipate that the reality is a mixed bag.

Take for example the following news item from friends of the earth. Much of it is fair enough, but there are some sentences which I find every bit as disgusting as Apples PR.

http://www.foe.co.uk/what_we_do/more_than_actions_40888.html

In particular:



> The wreckage of Bangka's tin mines, the living-hell of the DRC's conflict minerals, the cotton farm slavery of Uzbekistan - none of these belong in the 21st Century economy.
> 
> To be fair a great many companies get this and are immensely keen to know where their raw materials come from so they can be sure their procurement habits aren't contributing to anything nasty.
> 
> Many are also exploring what's known by sustainability egg-heads as circular business models. That means redesigning products and marketing to ensure goods and materials stay in use as long as possible. This in turn reduces the need for, and inevitable cost of, extracting fresh raw materials.



And to illustrate my point about this being a clash of PR strategies and the same sort of power games that cause leaders to pay attention to who goes through the door first and who places a hand on another leaders back:



> Apple's argument is that driving and part-funding an industry group to look into the problems and possible solutions to Bangka's woes is action enough, and serves as an "implicit" admission of its use of Bangka tin.
> 
> Really?





> Sometimes words are worth more than actions, because publicly admitting something is a sign you have the courage and commitment to do something about it, to change.



I have to get ready for work now but I would hope my problem with these statements is obvious. But in a nutshell there is laughable sanitation of capitalism and consumerism at work here, and I find it insulting that I'm supposed to believe that words are worth more than actions. Given that Apple is not short on words that at least pay lip service to the issues, it seems obvious that judgement should be based on what actually happens next, not whether a company dares to come up with its own shit rather than subscribe to the formula a pressure group demands of them. How the hell do I know whether Apples investigation of the tin stuff will be more or less effective than what Friends of The Earth thinks its gotten out of the PR departments of corporations that decided to play their particular game? What, for example, has Samsung committed to exactly?


----------



## sim667 (Sep 24, 2013)

editor I cant quote your post as my work firewall doesnt like the quote box for some reason.

But actually in response to you saying they won't admit if they use the tin, I posted and article in which apple states they are looking into it, its also covered in their supplier responsibility report http://www.apple.com/supplierresponsibility/reports.html

Both of which have been conveniently ignored throughout the thread and in the original article.

Anyway I can't dilly dally to debate this anymore, I have to educate da yoot now


----------



## pesh (Sep 24, 2013)

editor said:


> Samsung have admitted to their dodgy tin sourcing so that means progress can be made.



bollocks. they just don't give a shit. 'yes, we use dodgy tin, come at me bro...'

still banning their assembly staff from sitting down while working, but they have developed a new practice of outsourcing the really harmful jobs to private contractors though, so they're not responsible for any injures or illness caused.
http://stopsamsung.wordpress.com/2013/08/10/samsung-outsources-fatality-risk-to-contractors/

and they're being sued for $100m by Brazil for being cunts to their workers...
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a49c3cc6-04ff-11e3-9e71-00144feab7de.html


every bit as bad as Apple and their shitty PR machine, but Samsung have enough front to roll their sleeves up and get the dirty work done themselves with far less reliance of Foxconn to do the actual staff abuse...


good to know the S4 is the worlds first 'Sustainable Smartphone' though...

http://tcodevelopment.com/news/statement-regarding-certification-of-samsung-galaxy-s4/


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 24, 2013)

sim667 said:


> The story is about about samsung.... but of course apple are the root of all evil so lets overlook samsung and just focus on apple for the near future shall we?



Indeed, let's also conveniently forget that Samsung are also a weapons maker so hurt more people that way too.


----------



## elbows (Sep 24, 2013)

Well they probably haven't hurt many people through their military division yet because the countries they tend to sell to haven't indulged in armed conflict much yet. That may not remain the case forever though. For now its likely more people have died through the use of Samsung chips etc in other peoples war machinery than the arms they make directly themselves.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

It's all dirty. All products are made from blood, sweat and tears. It's capitalism.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 24, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> It's all dirty. All products are made from blood, sweat and tears. It's capitalism.



Well said, shame more fandroids can't see that.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

I think it's like supporting a football team for some techy people. With them all the way whatever they do.i have a mate who is like that with Apple products.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Sep 24, 2013)

elbows said:


> Well they probably haven't hurt many people through their military division yet because the countries they tend to sell to haven't indulged in armed conflict much yet. That may not remain the case forever though. For now its likely more people have died through the use of Samsung chips etc in other peoples war machinery than the arms they make directly themselves.


Look where Samsung is based - South Korea, right next to that nice friendly non-aggressive pacifist country North Korea with which they are still technically at war. Is it not logical that one of South Koreas biggest companies would make weapons? Britain also has a weapons industry and our products are used all over the world to kill people. No moral high ground available here.


----------



## elbows (Sep 24, 2013)

Anyway, returning to the issue of what any of these corporations are actually going to do about the tin mining:

If we look beyond the fact that as a campaign strategy friends of the earth demand companies admit to using the tin in question, and that Samsung were eventually willing to do that in a manner that Apple stubbornly (and typically, e.g. how they responded to Greenpeace pressure = on their own terms) refuse to do so, what are we actually left with?

Aside from the bit that made friends of the earth happy, back in April the meat of what Samsung said was:



> We believe that our work on this issue should be collaborative, and as a responsible business we are contacting suppliers, industry bodies and governments to better understand the issues that you raise and work together to find solutions. We will communicate with you again as we learn more about this matter.



Apples statement about this issue was:



> Recent concerns about the illegal mining of tin from this region prompted Apple to lead a fact-finding visit to learn more. Using the information we’ve gathered, Apple initiated an EICC working group focused on this issue, and we are helping to fund a new study on mining in the region so we can better understand the situation.



Spot the bleeding difference, the positions are almost identical! Unless Samsung has said anything further on the subject since April - any ideas?


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 24, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it's like supporting a football team for some techy people. With them all the way whatever they do.i have a mate who is like that with Apple products.



I guess but then I've never liked the tribal aspect of football and that's why I dislike the whole fanboy thing.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 24, 2013)

Hocus Eye. said:


> Look where Samsung is based - South Korea, right next to that nice friendly non-aggressive pacifist country North Korea with which they are still technically at war. Is it not logical that one of South Koreas biggest companies would make weapons? Britain also has a weapons industry and our products are used all over the world to kill people. No moral high ground available here.



Lol ok that's one hell of an apologist argument!


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> I guess but then I've never liked the tribal aspect of football and that's why I dislike the whole fanboy thing.


You are a tech fanboy though 
You start thread after thread of this shit!


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 24, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> You are a tech fanboy though
> You start thread after thread of this shit!



I'm not, I'm just a bit of a contrarian who happens to have an interest in the technological aspect of human evolution.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 24, 2013)

fuck off, all your threads are about tech, and tech related shit, unless its superhero films


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 24, 2013)

DotCommunist said:


> fuck off, all your threads are about tech, and tech related shit, unless its superhero films



Well done for proving my point! I'm happen to be interested in tech as it's a big part of human evolution and I post a lot about it. Remarkable insight that.

I make no bones that I don't kiss people's ass or have no problem with posting unpopular things. It's the job of the intellectual dissident to oppose, scrutinize and generally not blindly follow like sheep. That's the reason I first started posting on urban, and one of the main reasons I still do (despite it being nowhere near as fringe as it used to be).

If you don't like it or can't handle it then fine but that is your problem.  Often it's those without a spine, or a fully functioning mind of their own that react badly to those who have the guts to hold their own opinion.


----------



## DotCommunist (Sep 24, 2013)

I CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

He's just a maverick in a world of mooing cattle


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

Kid Eternity: intellectual dissident, speaker of truths, a renegade who refuses to choose between team apple and team android. Somebody stop him!


----------



## elbows (Sep 24, 2013)

Don't forget his brand of evolution-worship involves telling people who have their lives, finances, etc fucked over by 'progress' that its tough shit, suck it up, etc. If there were such a thing as karma his ultimate fate would be to excitedly tweet from multiple accounts at once (what a pro) about the wonderful journey he was on, only to realise at the last moment that his sorry carcass was on a conveyor belt to the crushing machine.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 24, 2013)

I can't decide whether he thinks he is Dr Manhattan or Ozymandias. Dunno why I'm thinking of the Watchmen.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I can't decide whether he thinks he is Dr Manhattan or Ozymandias. Dunno why I'm thinking of the Watchmen.



Closer to  Rorschach. Good call on referencing the excellent Watchmen.


----------



## Kid_Eternity (Sep 25, 2013)

elbows said:


> Don't forget his brand of evolution-worship involves telling people who have their lives, finances, etc fucked over by 'progress' that its tough shit, suck it up, etc. If there were such a thing as karma his ultimate fate would be to excitedly tweet from multiple accounts at once (what a pro) about the wonderful journey he was on, only to realise at the last moment that his sorry carcass was on a conveyor belt to the crushing machine.



You really do talk a lot of horse shit. There's nothing wrong with agreeing with evolution, there's a few things wrong with misrepresenting that evidence world view to defend financial racketeering and lies about the 'free' market.


----------



## golightly (Sep 25, 2013)

Kid_Eternity said:


> I'm not, I'm just a bit of a contrarian who happens to have an interest in the technological aspect of human evolution.



So what are your insights on the technological aspect of human evolution?


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I think it's like supporting a football team for some techy people. With them all the way whatever they do.i have a mate who is like that with Apple products.


I've changed phone brands at least four times in the last four years - HTC, Apple, Palm, Samsung - and had 3 different OSs, so I'm pretty sure I haven't got that ridiculous blinkered fanboy brand loyalty thing going on.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 25, 2013)

I have no loyalties either but I'm no techie. Many techies do get tribal though.
Don't you review techy stuff online? You'd be daft to be brand loyal if that's the case.


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I have no loyalties either but I'm no techie. Many techies do get tribal though.
> Don't you review techy stuff online? You'd be daft to be brand loyal if that's the case.


You'd think so, but there's no shortage of tech blogs who are _very much_ brand loyal.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 25, 2013)

editor said:


> You'd think so, but there's no shortage of tech blogs who are _very much_ brand loyal.


I read recently that a third of online reviews of products are bogus. Don't know how the fuck they got that figure, mind


----------



## editor (Sep 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> I read recently that a third of online reviews of products are bogus. Don't know how the fuck they got that figure, mind


I get at least one request every day offering me money if I let a "guest reviewer" post up an article on my site. 

I wrote a piece about it a while ago:
http://www.wirefresh.com/wirefresh-tech-blogs-and-the-curse-of-the-dishonest-guest-writers/


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> He's just a maverick in a world of mooing cattle



Yeah, well you're the Half-life 2 of posters. That means you're shit btw.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 25, 2013)

Cid said:


> Yeah, well you're the Half-life 2 of posters. That means you're shit btw.


Half-life 2 is one of my favourite games ever!


----------



## Cid (Sep 25, 2013)

Orang Utan said:


> Half-life 2 is one of my favourite games ever!



Well you've obviously just not iconoclastic enough. Another sheep sucking at the valve.


----------

