Apple needs to pull the pendulum back and bring users into the privacy fold

In the great landscape of Silicon Valley tech, Apple is a beacon of privacy. As the founder of an advocacy group that specifically deals with ethical technology, Apple is my go-to example for a Big Tech company that is getting many things right.

Last year’s rollout of Apple’s app tracking transparency framework, which targeted invasive ad tracking, put a huge lightning bolt of power back into the hands of consumers.

But a slew of engineers at Apple recently told The Information (paid) that the company’s efforts have had a major unintended consequence. Due to the stringency of privacy limitations, engineers are facing too many barriers to access the data they need to build the most valuable versions of products like Apple TV+, Siri, and Apple Maps. As a result, competitor products are gaining ground and it’s the Apple end-user who’s suffering the consequences.

As passionate as I am about privacy, I worry that Apple is making some avoidable mistakes in its zeal to get this right. According to Apple’s own engineers, the pendulum has swung too far and Apple is missing a key moment to develop good stuff for loyal customers, while bringing them into the fold and asking what they want when it comes to their data and the Apple ecosystem.

Let’s think about this from the consumer’s perspective in terms of what can be called the give-to-get ratio: I give you data, but what do I get in return? There are instances in which I can give something small and which poses minimal risk to my own privacy, while getting back something that is both useful to me and good for Apple, in a non-zero-sum way.

Companies like Netflix and Amazon have been particularly effective at harnessing the power of collective data to generate better results for the individual, particularly via a technique called collaborative filtering (“People who like Alien have also liked Predator, so let’s recommend it”). You can see how this general approach applies to Google Maps: “Most users who went to this taqueria entered through this door, so it’s reasonable to infer that door is the entrance.”

These examples are of high value to the user in a way that leverages the power of the collective data to generate better results.

Apple TV+ and Apple Maps are at an obvious—but unnecessary—disadvantage by not leveraging their collective data to their own benefit. But these changes are achievable, and could be done in a way that creates no privacy harm to the consumer. As The Information notes, Apple is already an early adopter of differential privacy, a technique that allows us to basically inject noise into data in a way that preserves privacy while allowing us to infer useful things from that data in an anonymized aggregated way. They already know how to engineer privacy into their offerings, so it’s peculiar that they don’t apply that general mindset everywhere.

It’s also ironic that the company that defines the gold standard for user experience in all ways, across devices and services, continues to see privacy as a peril and not an opportunity to delight users and increase trust through greater transparency. In the cases in which Apple continues to perceive potential privacy harms, why not simply ask consumers what they want?

Apple has a right to be worried, as evidenced by last year’s lawsuit it filed against the NSO Group, an Israeli surveillance company it claims targeted Apple users with spyware. Private researchers found the group’s client network of foreign governments deployed NSO’s Pegasus software against journalists, activists, and dissidents in a largely unregulated market. It was a dagger in the heart of privacy.

The NSO case is an obvious example of a terrible give-to-get ratio for the consumer. The consumer gives a lot, which is powerful and really useful for the taker, but results in low value, or even actual harm. And this probably explains the polar opposite approach Apple took on the heels of the debacle—but they’ve over-learned a lesson and built a bridge that goes too far.

Apple has a great opportunity to seize the advantage, to take privacy out of the shadows and the realm of long lawyerly documents no one reads. They can make their company-wide privacy settings clear, understandable, and actionable, just as they did for opt-in ad tracking consent last year in the App Store.

Take that same idea and point it at offerings like Apple TV+, Maps, and every other Apple experience. Apple Park might be surprised—delighted even—to see how many consumers say “yes” to getting tailored results when they have the power to select what option they want. And the brand benefits to Apple as a trusted steward of consumer data and steadfast protector of our privacy will reverberate in all directions.

It’s an opportunity to renew the vow made by the late Steve Jobs in 2010: “Privacy means people know what they’re signing up for, in plain English, and repeatedly.”

“I’m an optimist, I believe people are smart. And some people want to share more data than other people do. Ask them. Ask them every time. Make them tell you to stop asking them if they get tired of your asking them. Let them know precisely what you’re going to do with their data.”

Hear, hear, Steve.