Facebook, TikTok Least Trusted By Americans, Google Most Trusted, Says Survey (zdnet.com) 148
An anonymous reader quotes a report from ZDNet: Forty percent of Americans don't trust Facebook and TikTok and Google appears to be winning the trust wars, according to a survey from SeoClarity. SeoClarity surveyed 1,057 American residents to gauge trust in tech companies and found a majority of US citizens think social media companies need more regulation. The findings are notable due to how tech companies are stacking up on trust. Google tops Amazon, Microsoft and Apple on the trustworthy scores. Meanwhile, Facebook and TikTok were the most distrusted. SeoClarity also found that half of Americans think that Websites can control where they land in Google searches.
I don't trust google either (Score:4, Insightful)
Any day now they'll lock me out of my account for no apparent reason - or it could just happen to you.
Re: (Score:2)
Any day now they'll lock me out of my account for no apparent reason - or it could just happen to you.
Indeed, but with 1bn active accounts and the lockouts that get done, you may as well start playing the lottery.
There's a difference between trust, and likelihood of something occurring.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's not a lottery, it's a basic "If you're doing anything unusual like having more than one account or trying to keep distant your online private identity and your public identity, you're screwed" thing.
Nope. Still a lottery. Your use case is far from unusual. It's actually so common that Google even provide tools for you to manage multiple accounts and transfer stuff between them, and my real name sure as fuck isn't tied to either of them.
Locking out is common.
It really isn't. Or you have a very strange definition of common.
Re: (Score:2)
Cool story. Why should I care again? And should I buy Asteroid insurance while I'm at it? I mean the odds are there.
Re: (Score:2)
This is Google's (and YouTube's) biggest flaw and it's sad that they are not doing more to address it. If it was just possible to get hold of a human it would resolve a lot of the issues people have with them, especially on YouTube.
Why not trust Google & Amazon ? (Score:2)
As far as I can tell Google and Amazon have never sold my information. That's because my information is worth a fortune to them. OK, well combined with yours... They may give others access to me in various ways but only through their networks. The others never see my edress, etc. And the reality is that I'm rarely bothered even in this way.
Re: (Score:2)
Lol... I look for anything with google and I get random ads on every site I visit and even scam calls about the topic lately.
I have an android phone and more than once I've just talked about something and started getting ads for it.
Re: (Score:3)
I also get scam/ad calls about things I Google... except that I get these calls on my landline, which has nothing do do with Google. And it is obvious the people calling me are clueless about me, they know my name, probably from some old phonebook, but not much else.
I think it is just a coincidence. People are predictable. They will look for gifts during the Christmas season, tax-related things when it is time to do our taxes, vacation plans in the summer, and whatever is on the news. I am no exception. Lat
Re: (Score:2)
In my case, the timing is too specific and the items too particular. Google started violating their own standards several years ago. They are now a standard large corporation.
I've gone to another browser search engine as my first choice as a result. The android phone leak freaks me out a bit more for what it implies and I recall they did some tests that showed too much data was being sent way too often. I have a friend who faraday's there phone and another who keeps it turned off except to make outgoing
Itâ(TM)s really surprising apple is so low (Score:5, Interesting)
How does a company that makes the majority of its money on data mining/ads get more trust than Apple, a mostly hardware company that consistently pisses off the data mining companies?
Re: (Score:3)
Apple sells just as much software as hardware. Generally you can't use one without the other.
As far as the others go, selling ads would actually one of the more innocent things they do, assuming it stopped there. Of course it doesn't - but it's not the ads themselves I'm worried about.
The only thing that surprised me here is that the Reality Distortion Field has seemed to failed Apple. Was there something wrong with the survey? Has the loss of their VP of Marketing, Steve Jobs, really hurt them that much? H
"Trust themost" is open to a lot of interpretation (Score:2)
Not sure if the survey questions were different to the titles being presented but people could interpret that to mean:
* Do I trust them with my private data (Apple should be ahead of most others here)
* Do I trust them to get value from their products relative to the price I pay (I'm a big Apple fan but there are a few things priced in ways I can't even start to justify)
* Do I trust that I will have freedom with the hardware that I buy off them (Also not Apple's strong suit, though I don't think this would b
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
How does a company that makes the majority of its money on data mining/ads get more trust than Apple, a mostly hardware company that consistently pisses off the data mining companies?
For the same reason you can trust Coke to keep their recipe secret. When your primary business model depends on making money of other people's data, you protect that data.
That and possibly due to the fact that there's been basically no high profile Google cloud compromises, unlike say iCloud. If I *had* to put a dickpic in the cloud, and were forced to choose, based on past performance the safe money is on Google. Sure you'll get advertisements about penis size reduction surgery, but at least people won't b
Re: (Score:2)
Google could sell out, or be made to surrender, their large repository of data on all of us, at any time. That's why large large centralized collections of data simply need to be forbidden.
Re: (Score:2)
Google could sell out, or be made to surrender, their large repository of data on all of us, at any time.
Cool conspiracy theory. I look forward to reading about how one of the worlds single most wealthy nations would decide to sell out their primary means of making money in your newsletter. That should be an entertaining read.
Re: (Score:3)
Look at it from the consumer's point of view. Google offers lots of free services, its ads are not creepy because they are not targeted specifically at you but rather whole groups of people vaguely like you, and because Google is actually pretty good at making everything opt-in and giving you extensive privacy controls.
Compare to Apple who will charge you 30 Euros for a USB cable and then tell you that it's your fault that your butterfly keyboard broke because you typed on it wrong. Plus I think consumers a
Not much more trust (Score:2)
65% to 62%. I suspect that it's also a matter of openness. Google is completely open about what it's doing and Apple, famously, is not.
Re: (Score:3)
They still push OS updates for ancient devices like the iPhone 6. Find me an Android phone from that era still getting updates.
Facebook vs. Google??? Really??? (Score:2)
That's like rubbing dead tuna guts all over myself and deciding to jump in a tank full of alligators or sharks.
Both of them are in the same business, the only difference is Google couldn't get its act together enough to create the same social media network Facebook has to propagate conspiracy theories.
A better analogy is Cobra Commander vs Megatron; an incompetent super villain vs an efficient one.
Re: (Score:2)
the only difference is Google couldn't get its act together enough to create the same social media network Facebook has to propagate conspiracy theories.
Actually...this is a really good point. The link to the survey doesn't list out the actual questions being asked, which is critical to understanding the answers.
Google may be "trustworthy" in the context of "I generally don't get '5G causes coronavirus' content in my search results", but blocking every Google DNS name and IP on my router is going to break far more of the internet than blocking all of TikTok will. Whether one reads the question as "the information I find here" or "the company itself", or how
Re: (Score:3)
Why Google never ended up with a "social network" identical to Facebook is that Google+ got a late start and suffered from the network effect.
But I wouldn't say Google has nothing comparable either. YouTube has the majority of features Facebook does, and especially the ones conspiracy theorists thrive on, like algorithms that gradually push to more "engaging" (addictive, extremist) content.
Facebook's actually adopted more of YT's features over the years (like emphasis on video) than the other way around.
Re: (Score:2)
Why Google never ended up with a "social network" identical to Facebook is that Google+ got a late start and suffered from the network effect.
Google literally decided not to have a social network. It was just gaining popularity when they cancelled it, because they finally worked out the stupid. They moved the functionality to corporate subscribers only, it's part of their cloud office offering now. We beta tested it under pretense of getting it for free. Shock, amazement.
Whom is most not criminally inclined? (Score:1)
Let's see the results!
a) Al Capone (75%)
b) Tony Soprano (10%)
c) Bonnie (9%)
d) Clyde (6%)
Conclusion: Bonnie wins most innocent!
Re: (Score:2)
"Google most trusted" (Score:1)
Re:"Google most trusted" (Score:4, Informative)
That really isn't saying much at all.
It's saying a lot. People are really dumb.
Re:"Google most trusted" (Score:5, Insightful)
I found two cartons of milk in my by fridge, both open. One expired 8 days ago, the other over two weeks ago. In a contest of "most trusted" there is a clear winner. But I'm still going to throw both of them out.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, "trust" is a stupid word to use all encompassing.
I trust both your bottles of milk are still white.
I trust one more than the other when it comes to taste.
There are things I trust Google with. There are things I don't. Just like my mother. I trust she's looking after my house back home quite well. I don't trust that she won't throw a full size watermelon at me if I piss her off (a mistrust well placed). I also trust that resulting watermelon issue would be my fault and my job to clean up.
Re: (Score:2)
I found two cartons of milk in my by fridge, both open. One expired 8 days ago, the other over two weeks ago. In a contest of "most trusted" there is a clear winner. But I'm still going to throw both of them out.
I'd trust both cartons of spoiled milk more than Google or any other company on that list.
Agreed! (Score:2)
>"Forty percent of Americans don't trust Facebook and TikTok and Google appears to be winning the trust wars
I so much agree!
I trust Facebook and TikTok about 0.2% and Google 0.4%
>"Google tops Amazon, Microsoft and Apple"
Yes, they are so much less trustworthy at about maybe 0.3%, compared to 99% for both my Mom and my best friend.
Most trusted doesn't mean they're trusted (Score:2)
I trust the cholera a lot more than I trust the black death, yet I'd rather not deal with either.
It's just a matter of what's on offer. If there was a genuinely trustworthy Big Data company out there, Google would sink to the bottom.
Re: (Score:2)
If there was a genuinely trustworthy Big Data company out there, Google would sink to the bottom.
Google is what a [relatively] trustworthy Big Data company looks like. They don't sell your information, they only sell access to it. Of course, access to it is partial access to you; once you load their ad, the advertiser knows some things about you. But that's unavoidable.
Until Google has its own Cambridge Analytica scandal or similar, it's reasonable to consider it to be as trustworthy as such a service actually gets.
Of course, it's most important to remember that NSLs exist, and that NO data is safe-by-
Re: (Score:2)
Google doesn't sell your data? :) That's amusing. One wonders what their revenue comes from then.
Anyhow, even if they don't sell your data, they're so fucking huge and ubiquitous they're probably quite content to exploit it themselves for profit.
Either way, they sure ain't trustworthy. If you trust Google respect your privacy, you're mad as a hatter.
Re: (Score:2)
If you want an ad campaign targeting slashdot users 40-50 years old, Google will deliver those ads mostly to slashdot users aprox. 40-50 years old. Facebook will sell you a list of all slashdot users, including their address, job description, phone number and penis size so you can do the targeting yourself.
I totally agree (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
People still trust Google? (Score:2)
All of them (Score:2)
Sheep do (Score:2)
Google Most Trusted? (Score:2)
It's really only a matter of time (Score:2)
The winds will change. One service falls out of favor, another takes it's place. Google will have a turn eventually. All it will take is a couple of angry suburbanites with nothing better to do than hold signs in public. I'm surprised the internet giants haven't started hit-jobbing each other at this point.
I yearn for the days when the internet was young and difficult. The untamed net was a wild and interesting place. Now that any fool can get online the whole thing has become a 6th grade locker-room, presi
Google vs Apple? (Score:2)
How is Google more trusted than Apple?
The question should be the other way around. (Score:4, Insightful)
Other than abject patriotism and matriotism, why trust Google any more than Facebook or TikTok? They are all the same, systems trying to collect information about your purchasing power and preferences and manipulate them and you into buying shit you don't need.
Why "trust" any of them at all?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Not trying to defend Google as they have grown way too big but the difference between Facebook and Google is that Google holds on to their data.
Want to advertise to slashdot users, Google will target those ads, Facebook will sell you a list of slashdot users along with all kinds of personal data about them.
Re: (Score:2)
Using a word like "trust" in an all encompassing way is silly. There are things you can trust about companies and there are things you can't.
I trust Google to not sell my data wholesale to a 3rd party as doing to would reduce their ability to monetise said data (Coca Cola Co. sells drinks, not drink recipes)
I don't trust Google that they won't cut me off from the world due to some algorithm gone wrong and a complete lack of customer service to resolve the issue.
I trust Google to not suddenly abandon the Pla
Re: (Score:2)
I don't trust any entity that makes a great effort to gather up big comprehensive amounts of information about me and all of us.
You don't trust they will use that information to make money? I feel like you didn't even remotely understand my post.
Re: (Score:3)
There is a fundamental difference between Google and Facebook.
Google keeps the data it collects to itself. Facebook gives other people access to it.
Re: (Score:2)
LOL. "Fundamentally", the "privacy" policies of both companies are quite similar:
Abc: We may share non-personally identifiable information publicly and with our partners — like publishers, advertisers, developers, or rights holders. For example, we share information publicly to show trends about the general use of our services. We also allow specific partners to collect information from your browser or device for advertising and measurement purposes using their own cookies or similar technologies.
FFuc
Re: (Score:3)
Well, no, under GDPR they can't. They would have to ask for explicit, opt-in permission with a clear explanation of what they are asking for, if they wanted to do that.
Re:The question should be the other way around. (Score:4, Informative)
Greedy capitalism is the ultimate inner enemy of any democracy, as established by a metric assload of economic theory and empirical evidence, so congratulations, you've made a completely self-defeating statement.
Re: (Score:2)
Greedy capitalism is the ultimate inner enemy of any democracy, as established by a metric assload of economic theory and empirical evidence, so congratulations, you've made a completely self-defeating statement.
Please present this empirical evidence. Because based on say the entire 20th century where capitalist economies advanced democracy far more than any other system, I'm calling you out on that claim.
Re: (Score:2)
Print this, get your pencil and start reading.
https://www.cambridge.org/core... [cambridge.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Your link presents data that, lo and behold, money buys influence.
It provides no evidence that any alternative system does any better.
Capitalism causes democracy to be imperfect.
Non-capitalism systems destroy democracy completely.
Re: (Score:2)
In other words, you've got no argument against the point I'm making.
Thanks for playing.
Re: (Score:2)
There are a few varieties of democracy and even capitalism and it is likely that some versions work better then others. America is basically version 1 with a bunch of updates that aren't particularly democratic, ranging from the extreme influence money has in elections to the House of Representatives being locked to a low number of representatives in a growing population along with a lot of voter manipulation such as gerrymandering.
Re: (Score:2)
Democracy is the most retarded political system ever envisioned.
"Democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time" -- Winston Churchill
Re: (Score:2)
Print this, get your pencil and start reading.
https://www.cambridge.org/core... [cambridge.org]
Well I only got through the first few paragraphs, but that study seems to be comparing political systems or methods, not economic ones.
To clarify, Capitalism, the concept that private ownership and means of production, produces better results than any alternative.
Human History esp the 20th century demonstrated that quite clearly, although I'm happy to be proven otherwise, if you can provide relevant empirical evidence. Maybe just nominate a country that you feel did performed better without Capitalism?
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I can't really have a discussion with a functionally ignorant moron who cannot even read and understand one article.
Some things can't be helped, and ignorant morons are one of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, I can't really have a discussion with a functionally ignorant moron who cannot even read and understand one article.
Some things can't be helped, and ignorant morons are one of them.
Feel free to quote the passage that demonstrates your point rather than deflect with petty insults. I won't hold my breath, we know your type...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
>Once economic authority has been taken from the people, political authority must soon follow.
It seems, though, that capitalism leads to this situation through regulatory capture. The circle looks like this-wealth buys political influence, which creates a favorable environment for gathering greater wealth (and other influence)-which leads to greater concentration of wealth-which leads to larger purchases of influence, until there really is no influence left to purchase, and we have perfect regulatory cap
Re: (Score:2)
There is a large spectrum of capitalism and what you call socialism in various democracies with different results in varying amounts of how happy the population is. It seems that capitalism works best in certain domains and socialism in other domains. Natural monopolies are one example where various types of socialism can work better.
Re: (Score:2)
Once economic authority has been taken from the people, political authority must soon follow.
Well, economic authority was "taken from the people" of your country by the capitalist oligarchy a long time ago, and while your ruling class still maintains the facade of elections, today "the people" have virtually no input on policies and practically all policy is dictated by corporate interests. Most of this reallocation of authority has happened through various legalized bribery mechanisms - "independent" political action committees, lobbying and so on, things you have no influence over and cannot affo
Re: (Score:1)
Yeah, it's from China and Americans are really racist.
Because everything I disagree with is definitely racism...
But other than that, why distrust TikTok?
That's not how trust works. Trust is earned, so what has the CCP done in your opinion that instills trust?
Really? (Score:2, Interesting)
Yeah, it's from China and Americans are really racist.
Because everything I disagree with is definitely racism...
Let's be serious here for a minute. Name me a group of people that has invented more racial and ethnic slurs than Americans. There's not many choices.I have seen several long lists of slurs and you guys are always high up on the top ten list of inventors in the racial and ethnic slurs category and it's usually white Americans inventing slurs about other groups including non Anglo Saxon whites.
Re: (Score:2)
Go read about how the Belgians treated the Congolese. Or how the French operated in Asia. Just because you can't speak the language, doesn't mean there aren't ethnic and racial slurs throughout.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, like America, they're using genocide and slavery to advance and even have a manifest destiny type of philosophy driving them. Perhaps as America has grown up, so will China.
Re: (Score:2)
My point was that they're similar to other countries in being untrustworthy. Worse actually as at least they're more upfront about their evilness rather then pretending to be the free from evil.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I don't click YouTube links, especially with no idea whether it is goatse or what.
Re: (Score:2)
Sorry, I don't click YouTube links, especially with no idea whether it is goatse or what.
Try googling "Facts About SLÁVERY They Don't Teach You at School Thomas Sowell". The video is an excerpt of his work into debunking the common slavery myths being thrown around these days.
Re: (Score:2)
Well using DDG, I got this,
Re: (Score:2)
But perhaps you're just not really interested in learning anything new....
Re: (Score:2)
Try https://duckduckgo.com/?q=%22F... [duckduckgo.com]
Your query without quotes does work, unlike what I quoted on your post.
Unluckily I've hit my internet quota so not going to have the data to pursue this much until next week.
Looking quickly, he seems to be playing the race card and how it wasn't about race, which is true, even today America's slavery is about people who can't afford a lawyer, and it was likely the same when the natives were enslaved, along with others that were enslaved, such as the Irish.
Having a group
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yeah, it's from China and Americans are really racist. But other than that, why distrust TikTok?
It's quite possible to distrust a government without distrusting the ethnicity of the people. We're free to dislike things from China because of the policies of the Chinese government. Chinese people are just fine. Japan, Taiwan, and South Korea are ethnically very similar to China yet we have no issues with any technology out of there.
Re: (Score:2)
The other thing is that Japan, Taiwan and S. Korea were all brutal dictatorships within memory.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not racism to be afraid of a giant dictatorial regime slowly taking over the world.
Re: (Score:3)
a reasonable solid argument can be made that there's no racism towards Chinese here in the States.
That is not a solid argument at all, but is definitely a very solid non-sequitur.
In fact, it may be the most solid one i'll see this month.
Re: Other than racism, why distrust TikTok? (Score:2)
Ba-da-ba-da-ba-be bop ba bodda bope (Yeah, I'm the Scatman)
Re:Other than racism, why distrust TikTok? (Score:5, Interesting)
a reasonable solid argument can be made that there's no racism towards Chinese here in the States.
I am a white guy with an Asian spouse and two kids who mostly self-identify as Asian (At school, they hang with the Asian nerds rather than the cool white kids). There are definitely areas where Asians are treated differently, including housing, lending, education, and employment. Some discrimination is in a positive direction. Some is not.
Housing: Asians are perceived as quiet and clean. So there are many housing ads published in Chinese. This isn't overtly racist, but it implies that other races need-not-apply.
Lending: Asians are perceived as good credit risks, and statistically, this is true. There is a big network of Chinese-to-Chinese lending, and many banks and mortgage brokers tap into this market by hiring Mandarin and Cantonese-speaking employees. I refinanced two houses using this network at better rates than I would have otherwise been offered.
Education: Many colleges try to achieve diversity, which often leads to discrimination against Asians who are held to higher standards. There is a lawsuit [wikipedia.org] working its way toward the Supreme Court, which may affect this practice.
Employment: Asians don't have difficulty getting hired, but they are less likely to be promoted into management.
Re: (Score:3)
a reasonable solid argument can be made that there's no racism towards Chinese here in the States.
I am a white guy with an Asian spouse and two kids who mostly self-identify as Asian (At school, they hang with the Asian nerds rather than the cool white kids). There are definitely areas where Asians are treated differently, including housing, lending, education, and employment. Some discrimination is in a positive direction. Some is not.
Housing: Asians are perceived as quiet and clean. So there are many housing ads published in Chinese. This isn't overtly racist, but it implies that other races need-not-apply.
Lending: Asians are perceived as good credit risks, and statistically, this is true. There is a big network of Chinese-to-Chinese lending, and many banks and mortgage brokers tap into this market by hiring Mandarin and Cantonese-speaking employees. I refinanced two houses using this network at better rates than I would have otherwise been offered.
Education: Many colleges try to achieve diversity, which often leads to discrimination against Asians who are held to higher standards. There is a lawsuit [wikipedia.org] working its way toward the Supreme Court, which may affect this practice.
Employment: Asians don't have difficulty getting hired, but they are less likely to be promoted into management.
I definitely agree that there is institutionalized discrimination against Asians in education in the USA. When some groups benefit from affirmative action others must lose from it. That is a simple statistical fact. And Asians are on the losing side of that one.
Regarding promotion into management: Are you sure this is discrimination? My personal experience with Asians (one example: I had an Asian manager for >5 years but I have also worked with a lot of other Asians) is that Asians generally value hard p
Re: (Score:2)
The white nerds form their own group.
There are no cool Asian kids.
Re: (Score:2)
Asian-Americans score about 5 points above the norm on IQ tests.
Asian-Americans get better grades and have higher SAT scores.
Caltech has an ethnically blind admissions process. The result is that 44% of admitted students are ethnically Asian. That is 9 times their proportion of the American population.
Most other elite universities have lower proportions of Asians because they discriminate by race.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't know if you're trying to be funny or serious but us Americans are gebnerally far too ignorant to differentiate between, say, Han Chinese and Japanese...
That's why they're teaching kids how to differentiate between the two.
Sacramento teacher uses offensive slant-eyes to depict Asians during online class [sacbee.com]
In the video, Burkett appears to be depicting a version of the racist school-yard taunt, “Chinese, Japanese, Dirty Knees,” although she does not recite the chant.
“If your eyes go up, you’re Chinese,” Burkett said, stretching her eyes out and upwards. “If they go down, they’re Japanese. If they’re just straight
Re: (Score:1)
Have you watched all the BLM public statements ?
How many celebrities have mentioned blacks in africa, or children working for Nike
Re: (Score:2)
Re:WOW! 1,057 Americans! Just like political polls (Score:4, Insightful)
It can't possibly be because whoever posted it doesn't understand that 1,057 people can't represent all Americans.
Only if you failed high school level Statistics. Look up random sampling and stop making a fool of yourself.
Re: (Score:2)
You might be "the absolute fool" if you claim that a random sample is "strategically chosen" without providing any evidence for such a claim. Can you point what you think is an evidence of a bias, how it came about and why?
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:3)
You could have just said "I've got nuthin".
Re: (Score:1)
Re:WOW! 1,057 Americans! Just like political polls (Score:4, Informative)
You're the absolute fool if you believe that 1,057 "random people" from some specific, most probably strategically chosen place/s in America, can represent all 300+ million people in the USA.
1057 people can represent 300M. In fact, the population size isn't even a factor in statistical accuracy.
Whether the samples were randomly distributed is a different issue, but you have provided no evidence that they were biased.
Re: (Score:2)
The sample size is fine. What's not is the sample bias. Strangely enough, a few years ago when the polls started being regularly off by double-digit percentages, is when we got double-digit percentages of the population imagining that the guy on the other end of the line is into pedophiles and pentograms. Understandably, when you're so afflicted, you hang up the receiver as quickly as possible and grab your rosary.
Answering the poll questions just isn't going to happen. Add a persecution complex to the mix,
Re: (Score:2)
Polling seems pretty good to me.
Sure, you don't get exact numbers, but they're usually withing a few percent and that's way closer than a wild ass guess.
Re: (Score:2)