After seeing multiple facets of Mike Daisey’s monologue about the conditions Foxconn and its relationship with Apple, we have all become very familiar with the story. Clearly, there is agony behind the ecstasy of Apple; the working conditions at the Chinese factory that produces many revered Apple products are poor and should be changed. The question is not if they should be changed, but rather who should institute this change. The burden of facilitating change seems to be one that nobody wants to shoulder. Additionally, the issue seems to be one that nobody wants to claim as their responsibility. This entire controversy has boiled down to all of the players in this situation pointing fingers about who is truly culpable. It seems to me that there are three main players; Apple (and other technology companies), international law, and society. Society, which can be comprised of consumers, protestors, non governmental groups, performers like Mike Daisey etc. has been working hard to draw attention to this issue. Alex Lyras, at the end of Bucknell’s “un/real and un/true” performance, asked every audience member to contact Apple’s CEO to demand change. Workers at the factory and other citizens have been involved in numerous protests surrounding the subject. Yet what can they really do? Besides a full blown boycott of all goods produced at Foxconn, I cannot foresee society having a lasting impact on working conditions. Legally, they do not have the right to. Raising awareness and drawing attention to the situation has helped both Apple and the Chinese government focus on resolving this issue, which is a clear benefit, yet I do not think that society has the potential to do more than pressure the situation to change. So that leaves us to point fingers at both Apple and the law. Both have the power to change the situation at hand, yet nobody has done it yet. Why? Apple, on one hand, is a powerhouse company whose products are constantly in high demand. In order to keep up with consumer demand, Apple relies on factories like Foxconn to produce products in high quantities. Apple does their ‘best’ to regulate working conditions, but all in all they lay the blame on Foxconn and labor laws in China. Labor laws are different across the globe, and the relationship between Foxconn and Apple is a perfect example of this. Labor laws in China are not as strict as American policy, setting different standards for each country. Therefore, it is difficult for Apple, a company who relies on outsourcing, to find suppliers who will 100% comply with American standards for working conditions. In order to seriously enact change in the realm of factory life, I believe that international law must create new, higher standards for work. If standards are raised, factories will have no choice but to improve, if only marginally, to appear better. Once this change is set in stone, one can only hope that the conditions at Foxconn and factories all around the world will improve.