Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg Lack Moral Values, Says Joseph Stiglitz: Apple as an Ethical Alternative Model

Social media has taken a perilous turn. This isn’t just an observation from casual onlookers—it’s a stark warning from Joseph Stiglitz, the renowned Nobel Prize-winning economist. In a bold and provocative statement, Stiglitz has accused tech titans Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg of wielding unprecedented manipulative power through their platforms, X (formerly Twitter) and Instagram. He contrasts their approach with an alternative vision of ethical leadership exemplified by Tim Cook and Apple. Beyond the ethical and democratic concerns, Stiglitz’s critique opens the door to a broader discussion about the ecological consequences of these tech giants’ operations—a dimension that is equally critical in today’s world.

Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg: Unmatched Power to Shape Minds and Societies

Stiglitz pulls no punches in his assessment. He argues that social media platforms, as harnessed by Musk and Zuckerberg, have eclipsed even the propaganda tools of the Nazi regime in their potency. It’s a jarring comparison, but one that invites serious reflection. Never before has a single technological infrastructure granted individuals—or corporations—the ability to mold public opinion with such immediacy and scale. Platforms like Instagram and X boast instantaneous, global reach, capable of swaying elections, inflaming societal tensions, and deepening polarization across entire populations.

Elon Musk, in particular, has embraced his role as an ideological architect. Since acquiring Twitter and rebranding it as X, he has openly tweaked its algorithms to amplify certain political narratives, often aligning with his own libertarian leanings. Meanwhile, Mark Zuckerberg’s Meta empire—spanning Instagram, Facebook, and WhatsApp—relies on sophisticated algorithms and relentless data harvesting to fuel its advertising machine. Together, these leaders have turned mass manipulation into both a business strategy and a political weapon.

In his book The Road to Freedom, Stiglitz ties this phenomenon to broader societal shifts, including the rise of populism and the erosion of democratic norms. He contends that the unchecked power of these platforms undermines the free exchange of ideas, replacing it with curated echo chambers that serve the interests of their creators. The ecological toll of this digital dominance is less discussed but no less significant. The sprawling data centers powering X and Meta’s operations guzzle vast amounts of energy, contributing to a carbon footprint that rivals that of small nations. This reliance on fossil fuel-heavy grids stands in stark contrast to more sustainable alternatives, raising questions about the environmental cost of their influence.

Selon le lauréat du prix Nobel Joseph Stiglitz, « Elon Musk et Mark Zuckerberg manquent de valeurs morales ». Il existe un modèle éthique alternatif : Apple

Apple and Tim Cook: A Counterpoint of Privacy and Responsibility

Amid this race to exploit user data, Tim Cook stands out as a dissenting voice. Since taking the helm at Apple, Cook has positioned privacy as a cornerstone of the company’s ethos—a direct rebuke to the data-hungry models of Meta and X. Unlike Zuckerberg’s empire, which thrives on turning its users into commodities for advertisers, Apple has built its brand on the promise that customers are not the product. This commitment is more than rhetoric; it’s a key selling point for iPhones, iPads, and Macs: your data stays with you unless you explicitly allow otherwise.

Cook’s leadership has produced tangible examples of this philosophy in action:

In 2016, Apple famously refused an FBI request to unlock an iPhone belonging to a terrorist, citing the global security risks of creating such a backdoor.
In 2025, the company pushed back against a British law mandating a universal backdoor for iCloud, reinforcing its stance on encryption.
The introduction of App Tracking Transparency (ATT) in 2021 forced apps to seek user consent before tracking them—a move that kneecapped Meta’s ad revenue model overnight.
Even in artificial intelligence, Apple distinguishes itself. Its “Apple Intelligence” system processes data locally on devices or in a secure “private cloud,” avoiding the centralized, energy-intensive data centers favored by competitors.

Ecologically, Apple’s approach offers a counterweight to its rivals. The company has poured billions into renewable energy, aiming to power all its operations—data centers, offices, and retail stores—with 100% clean energy. By 2030, Apple claims it will achieve carbon neutrality across its supply chain, a goal bolstered by initiatives like recycling programs and durable product design. Compare this to Meta and X, where transparency about energy use is scarce, and the environmental cost of their sprawling server farms remains largely unaddressed. Apple’s model suggests that tech giants can innovate without sacrificing the planet—a notion that Stiglitz implicitly endorses as part of a more ethical framework.

Clashing Titans: Tensions Between Cook, Musk, and Zuckerberg

The divergence in values between Cook and his counterparts has sparked open hostilities. Mark Zuckerberg has dismissed Cook’s privacy advocacy as naive, arguing it overlooks the complexities of a data-driven economy. Meta has felt the sting of Apple’s policies firsthand—ATT alone reportedly cost the company billions in ad revenue, prompting Zuckerberg to pivot toward the metaverse as a new frontier for growth. Yet, even this ambitious shift has ecological downsides: virtual reality and AI projects demand immense computational power, further straining Meta’s energy-intensive infrastructure.

Elon Musk, meanwhile, has clashed with Apple over more practical matters. He’s repeatedly criticized the App Store’s 30% commission rate as exploitative, a grievance shared by many developers but amplified by Musk’s outsized platform. In 2024, tensions escalated when Apple pulled its advertising from X, citing Musk’s lenient moderation policies that allowed misinformation and hate speech to flourish. Musk retaliated by threatening to build a rival smartphone—an idea that fizzled but underscored the rift. Ecologically, Musk’s ventures like Tesla and SpaceX tout sustainability, yet X’s operations lag behind, relying on conventional energy sources that belie his green credentials elsewhere.

These conflicts highlight a fundamental divide: Cook’s Apple prioritizes user autonomy and environmental stewardship, while Musk and Zuckerberg chase influence and profit, often at the expense of both privacy and the planet. Stiglitz sees this as a microcosm of capitalism’s broader failings—unrestrained power concentrated in too few hands, with consequences that ripple across societies and ecosystems alike.

Stiglitz’s Vision: A Progressive Capitalism to Rein in Tech

So, what’s the solution? Stiglitz advocates for a “progressive capitalism” that reins in the excesses of tech giants through robust state intervention. His proposals include:

Stricter Regulation of Social Media: Platforms should face accountability akin to traditional media, with rules to curb misinformation and manipulation.
Breaking Up Monopolies: Antitrust measures could dismantle the dominance of Meta and X, fostering competition and innovation.

Social media isn’t just entertainment—it shapes how we engage with information, politics, and each other. Stiglitz warns that the current trajectory threatens democracy itself, as algorithms amplify division and drown out reason. The ecological stakes are just as high: unchecked digital expansion fuels climate change, with little regard for sustainability. Apple, while imperfect, offers a glimmer of hope—a tech giant that balances profit with principles, proving that ethical and ecological responsibility can coexist with success.

Ecological Implications: A Deeper Dive

The ethical critique of Musk and Zuckerberg extends beyond user manipulation to the environmental footprint of their empires—a dimension Stiglitz nods to but doesn’t fully unpack. Let’s explore this further.

Energy Consumption and Carbon Footprint
The data centers powering X and Meta’s platforms are energy hogs, processing billions of posts, ads, and interactions daily. A single data center can consume as much electricity as a small city, often relying on coal or natural gas in regions with lax renewable energy adoption. Greenpeace estimates that the tech sector accounts for 2–3% of global greenhouse gas emissions—a figure poised to rise as social media usage balloons. Apple, by contrast, has slashed its carbon footprint by shifting to solar, wind, and hydropower. Since 2018, its facilities have run on 100% renewable energy, a feat neither Meta nor X has matched. This disparity underscores a broader truth: ethical tech isn’t just about privacy—it’s about planetary survival.
Product Lifecycles and E-Waste
Apple’s focus on durability sets it apart. iPhones receive software updates for 5–7 years, extending their lifespan and reducing e-waste. The company’s repair programs and trade-in incentives further curb landfill contributions. Meanwhile, Meta and X thrive on ephemeral content—posts and trends that vanish quickly, encouraging a throwaway digital culture. This indirectly drives device turnover as users upgrade to keep pace with bandwidth-heavy features like Instagram Reels or X’s live streams. The ecological toll of this obsolescence is staggering: millions of discarded devices leach toxic metals into soil and water each year. Apple’s approach, while not flawless, mitigates this cycle, aligning with Stiglitz’s call for sustainable systems.
Transparency and Accountability
Apple’s annual environmental reports detail its emissions, recycling efforts, and renewable energy use, empowering consumers to hold it accountable. Meta and X, however, offer scant insight into their ecological impact. Critics like the Electronic Frontier Foundation have slammed their opacity, noting that vague sustainability pledges mask a reliance on dirty energy. This lack of transparency erodes trust and hinders collective action against climate change—an area where Apple’s openness sets a benchmark.
Broader Ecological Context
The stakes extend beyond individual companies. Social media amplifies climate denial and consumerism, often fueled by Musk’s and Zuckerberg’s platforms. X, under Musk, has become a megaphone for polarizing narratives, including skepticism about green policies. Instagram’s influencer culture peddles fast fashion and luxury goods, driving overconsumption. Apple, while not immune to consumerism critiques, avoids these pitfalls by emphasizing privacy over ad-driven excess. Its ecological ethos could inspire a tech industry shift—if regulators heed Stiglitz’s call to curb unchecked power.

A Call for Ethical and Ecological Tech

Joseph Stiglitz’s critique of Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg isn’t just about moral failings—it’s a warning about the intertwined crises of democracy and ecology. Their platforms wield godlike influence, shaping minds and societies while leaving a hefty environmental scar. Tim Cook’s Apple, though not without flaws, offers a compelling alternative: a tech model that prioritizes privacy, sustainability, and accountability over exploitation and waste.

As climate change accelerates and democratic norms fray, the need for a responsible tech paradigm grows urgent. Stiglitz’s “progressive capitalism” could pave the way—regulating social media, dismantling monopolies, and incentivizing green innovation. Apple’s example proves it’s possible to thrive without selling out users or the planet. In a world where algorithms increasingly dictate reality, the fight for an ethical—and ecological—future may be the defining struggle of our time.