Who Do You Trust?
That's an intriguing question.
It applies to personal relationships and business matters alike. I suspect the recent slippage in mainstream media readership has been a function of a loss of trust.
This question has repercussions for other corporate relationships you may have, too.
Consider: Apple (AAPL) can get away with a snafu like the iPhone pricing issue, because it has earned the trust, even the adoration, of its users. Could you imagine having that trust with Microsoft (MSFT)?
Dell used to have that trust, but frittered it away, as they moved from one of the best to much worse customer service in the PC space. AOL also -- they've decayed, become a garbage service for the clueless. (AIM remains mostly worthwhile).
Google (GOOG) has earned my confidence, and -- so far -- has not given me any reason to reconsider that trust.
Yahoo (YHOO) still has some residual trust -- but its waning fast. I still use Yahoo as a home page, but their inattentiveness to some of their properties is shameful. They have a very, very brief period to right the ship, or their long horrific slide into irrelevancy will be irreversible. Yahoo has frittered away so many good properties, I find it embarrassing. (WhoTF is advising them?)
I run across an inordinate amount of spam in anything Yahoo related (think Hotmail, circa 2001). My office IM is Trillian, and I come in each morning to at least one, often more, Yahoo IM spams. (WTF? Can't you stop that?) Lots of blog comment spam is via a Yahoo email address. And what was once a grand experiment in investor democracy -- the message boards -- decayed into a haven for spammers, scammers, or worse. Shameful wastage. This should have been aggressively attacked 5 years ago.
Then there's the run of existing companies that seem to become rather careless with their clients data.
Which leads me to this morning's topic: Trusting new companies with your personal data.
Some time ago, I explained in painful detail Why I Don't Do Social Networking Sites. The short version is, I don't trust these companies with my data. And I don't trust that their VC backers or a judge at any bankruptcy hearing to treat my personal data the way they would want their 16 year old daughters to be treated.
The latest reminder of this involves Scoble and Facebook. For those of you who may be unfamiliar, Scoble is a nice enough fellow who I refused to read back when he was working as Microsoft's Leni Riefenstahl. I know too much about the evil empire to acquiesce to a warm fuzzy face being placed on them.
Anyway, for scraping his own freakin' data off their site, Scoble's account was erased. A big brouhaha erupted, and after some ring kissing and genuflecting, he was readmitted.
Which brings me back to our topic today, that of Trust.
I am naturally skeptical. I see too much bullshit everywhere. Hence, I believe Trust is something that must be earned, not given away. Not demanded, not assumed, but actually earned. Especially if you are a startup company, with enormous access to lots and lots of very personal data. These firms should have to earn your confidence. They have gotten carte blanche so far, but I suspect the era of blind faith is coming to an end.
Ask yourself these questions: Who do I trust? Who can I rely on, confide in, bank on, have faith in?
Who do you read? Who do you let get inside your head? Who do you believe? Who are you sure about?
What companies do you entrust with your personal files and passwords? Your social security number, bank account data, personal financial info, data?
Who do you trust?
And, who trusts you back . . .?
Saturday, January 05, 2008 | 09:18 AM | Permalink
| Comments (47)
| TrackBack (1)
add to de.li.cious | 
digg this! | 
add to technorati | 
email this post
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c52a953ef00e54fc107858833
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Who Do You Trust?:
» Micro-Hoo!: Desktop vs Internet from The Big Picture
Alternative title: Who Do You Trust?, Part II Last month, we looked at the question: Who Do You Trust?. That discussion considered how the issue of trust impacts various corporate tech firms. In light of yesterday's Micro-Hoo! announcement (Ya-soft?), ... [Read More]
Tracked on Feb 2, 2008 7:10:29 AM
Comments
Nearly everyone lies, except when dealing in the abstract. Everyone promises to be fair and just, until they see someone who has something the want. Then it becomes a game of screw your buddy.
I developed the concept of an honesty trap and used it on occasion. Simply put, you create a situation where the other person benefits if fair dealing is achieved. If the other person tries to screw me over, it becomes a case of "I'm rubber, you're glue. It bounces of me and sticks to you."
Amazingly, some people still tried to pull a fast one. In one case, a person paid, I'm sure, huge legal bills in trying to set up a situation where they wanted to take advantage of me. I was in a 'yes / no' position regarding their offer and the situation was one where neither could walk away. Eventually we agreed to a win-win situation after their lawyer ran up a lot of hours.
People are, by nature, liars, thieves, and fast buck con artists. Even my former preacher lost interest in me after I made it clear I would not subsidize his need to be Santa year round.
You just noticed this?
Posted by: cinefoz | Jan 5, 2008 10:16:41 AM
in terms of finance/money, i only trust gold.
in terms of readings & economic theory, common sense investors who came of age prior to EMH & MPT. (rothbard, mises, buffett, rogers, gartman, etc.)
i sound like some old crazy gold bug (which i am NOT; i hate gold & i am not voting for ron paul) but these guys are the only ones that seem to have gotten things right over the last few. everyone else has been flat wrong.
i agree that too many institutions have been destroying that bond of trust for too long. it's a result of a society that equates honesty with being a sucker.
Posted by: m3 | Jan 5, 2008 10:28:36 AM
"The short version is, I don't trust these companies with my data."
I never understood why people would go for online backups or online apps. My data stays on my drive.
Who do I trust? or trust but verify?
I trust Amazon. I have had issues with some of their partners and Amazon has always made good.
I read as much as I can and try to sort it out for myself by looking at the (pardon the pun) big picture. I do skip right wing propaganda like Fox or Murdock.
I used to trust the WSJ news but I really am skeptical with Murdock owning in now.
The Financial Times and BBC are also other sources I like.
And of course that "skeptical as 'me'" - BR.
Posted by: me | Jan 5, 2008 10:36:28 AM
Oh yeah, Cinefoz is not on my birth certificate or any other record outside of the world of anonymous internet postings. However, the email address is real, sort of. It is a disposable alias. Sorry, I only trust you a little. Nice blog, though.
Posted by: cinefoz | Jan 5, 2008 10:42:51 AM
I trust my husband. And my sister. No one else. But you gotta pay the bills, so some of them see my stuff.
News-I read em all and figure it out myself.
Posted by: babygal | Jan 5, 2008 10:49:59 AM
Listen to this! I took my daughter to the ski slope and rented a snowboard for her. They wanted to hold my driver's license and visa card until I returned the snowboard. Then the rental agreement wanted my social security number! I explained to the pierced goth/stoner kid that there was no way I would give him all that information so call the supervisor. I was the only person there that objected. Everyone else gave them all the information. P.S. I had my identity stolen a couple years ago and it was a nightmare. I finally got it sorted out and a supervisor at vendor I was dealing with told me to never, ever, give anyone my driver's license number. He said anyone can get your SSN, so that's no big deal.
Posted by: dan in michigan | Jan 5, 2008 11:10:07 AM
great post-referred from Dr Paul K. Whom I've never met but he earned my trust through his blog.
Trust concerns are valid in this new environment of transparency and free speech. Who do you trust is key because some sites are getting ratings by lying and other by PR stunts.
~~~
BR: Dr. Paul K ?
Is that Krugman -- or Kedrosky ?
Posted by: John Furrier | Jan 5, 2008 11:18:52 AM
Well, I guess I must trust the "full faith and credit" of the U.S. government because I keep taking I.O.U.s as compensation for work performed - the same kind of trust one would have in the Godfather when he makes an offer that "can't be refused."
Posted by: Winston Munn | Jan 5, 2008 11:19:38 AM
Trust no one.
Posted by: bucky katt | Jan 5, 2008 11:22:59 AM
Larry Kudlow and Jim Cramer.
Oh the question was who DO you trust.
Posted by: MAS (Seattle) | Jan 5, 2008 11:24:32 AM
Any person or entity that has money in their heart and not in their head loses my faith; however, that level of scrutiny is difficult to achieve; therefore, "trust" can be considered an "investment." In that regard, it all boils down to managing risk. Every person or entity should be trusted to a certain degree and we increase risk as we increase our trust in that person or entity. Another parallel with investing is that "real risk" increases as "perceived risk" declines... That's why we can get "burned" when we blindly trust the wrong person or entity...
Posted by: The Financial Philosopher | Jan 5, 2008 11:34:35 AM
Rutters
January 5, 2008
Washington, D.C.
BUSH TO ADD WORDS REALLY, REALLY TO SPEECH
In a surprise announcement from the White House today, a spokesperson indicated the President Bush has decided to address the nation's economic cocnerms by adding the words really, really to his speech Monday.
Instead of the phrase, "Economic fundamentals are sound", the President has elected instead to declare that "Economic fundamentals are really, really sound," said the spokeperson.
Treasury head Henry Paulson lauded the change as "a step forward," while Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke stated that the data supported the first "really" but further data was necessary to actually substantiate the second "really".
"However," said Bernanke, "using two reallys is certainly a courageous and proper method for the President to use to stem ongoing credit market concerns."
On a related note, T.V. personality Jim Cramer was quoted as saying, "They have no CLUE!"
Pre-market trading was mixed on the conflicting news and profit taking.
Posted by: Winston Munn | Jan 5, 2008 11:50:05 AM
Why does Scoble own the data of his friend's on Facebook? Doesn't that belong, um, to his friend's? I'm a friend of Scoble's, and he didn't ask me if he could have my birthday, he took it. That's MY data, if it is anyone's.
In addition to which, the usage agreement he is held under for Facebook makes it clear he in fact doesn't own that data.
Posted by: Chris | Jan 5, 2008 11:54:33 AM
We have institutionalized a culture of lies in America.
Our government lies and steals.
Our corporate leaders lie and steal.
Our borrowers and lenders lie and steal.
And we sugar coat all this deceit with nouns like 'marketing' and 'spin', with no penalties for the miscreants.
So when it comes to the stock market, the key to success is the same as that used by its practitioners - think like a criminal.
Posted by: Cynic | Jan 5, 2008 11:57:32 AM
I trust that over any 20 year time period global small cap stocks will outperform every other asset class because the world keeps growing and innovating. Even though I trust ETF's over mutual funds, I trust the VICE Fund will out perform most indexes over every 20 year time period because with freedom we all become typical.I trust physical gold, but besides the GLD ETF there is no real honest liquid market. And I trust Wall St. will come back and find new ways to make money again.
We all trust google a lot, it's kind of scary. I trust that my DVD collection will become pointless as did my VHS collection, because there will be something new. I trust that if i buy a new phone or video game console that I will want another new one in a couple of months and be pissed i didn't wait. I trust that CNBC will always have bearish people on television on down days and bullish people on up days.
I do not trust WEBMD as it tells me I have many diseases when I just have a cold.
I do not trust Decaf coffee. I do not trust that employees wash their hands in the bathroom in restaurants. I do not trust cold callers. I do not trust rental real estate brokers or the BS descriptions they put on their website postings. I also do not trust social networking sites or people who do trust social networking sites. I don't really trust weather forecasters.
Lastly, I trust that even a broken clock is right twice a day just like every permabull and permabear...
Posted by: Eleven | Jan 5, 2008 12:10:28 PM
Whom? Right?
Posted by: grmarpolice | Jan 5, 2008 12:13:02 PM
Yahoo: Yes, it is sad. My GMail account filters virtually all the spam into a spam folder. My Yahoo Mail account always presents me with a multitude of spams in the Inbox. If Google can do it, why not Yahoo?
Data: If I give you my email and birthday, I assume you'll put it a number of places. Too many online services are one way, the data comes in and is never allowed to leave. But that will change, just like with the record companies finally giving up on DRM, the social networking sites will soon finally give up on being closed systems.
Posted by: Bob Morris | Jan 5, 2008 12:50:57 PM
I trust the Federal Government...
BWAHAHhahhhahahaaHa!
Heh.
Posted by: Marcus Aurelius | Jan 5, 2008 1:14:06 PM
Barry - I'll tell you about one organization that I trust less, and that's the New York Times.
As (another) example, in this morning's article entitled: "Unemployment Sounds Warning About the Economy", the authors stated: "In calculating the rate of job growth, the Labor Department relies upon a sampling of payroll data and an EXTRAPOLATION (my emphasis) of how many jobs have been created and destoyed. An Extrapolation?? Nowhere, and I mean nowhere in this timid article are there references to that Dark Star, the computer Birth/Death Model, much less any question or controversy involving its its use or abuse. In fact, the article continues that "the houshold survey is notoriously volatile & treated with SKEPTICISM" (again, my emphasis!). Yeah, and the birth/death model assumes "fatwa" status! The establishment Times is too stupid and corrupt to be a reliable source for economic reporting!
Posted by: John Badalian | Jan 5, 2008 1:20:48 PM
off topic:
Bears beware...FED maybe heading towards 50 bps cut, and there will be another rally.....
in other words cover your shorts, sharpen your knives and start all over again after rate cut....
http://tinyurl.com/2x83f7
Posted by: techy2468 | Jan 5, 2008 1:30:43 PM
I trust that the elected public officials have my best interest at heart. That George Bush, Henry Paulson, Ben Bernanke all understand the unfolding financial stress and have planned out thoroughly an effective strategy that is designed to protect my assets. That the Government reporting and trade association reporting is 100% unbiased, objective and is delivered with intent to ensure I have a purely objective and contextually correct understanding of what is important. That the market regulatory authorities are taking every effort to ensure that the trading and custody of my equity holdings are safeguarded with complete integrity. I trust that the mainstream media is doing its utmost to ensure it is never lazy, is completely diligent in ensuring all headlines and background data is verified, reliable and relevant before going to press. I trust that I've had enough Bourbon now and I can put down the bottle before any more dribble comes off my finger tips....
Posted by: Stuart | Jan 5, 2008 1:48:41 PM
- Steven Spielberg
- Newegg product ratings (by the customers)
- David Ansen movie reviews in Newsweek
- Jimmy Carter
- Tim Russert
- Pixar
- John Stossel
- Ukrops (but I moved, sigh)
- Frontline
- NPR
- Immediate family
Out of time, I'm sure there's more.
Posted by: That Guy Drinks Beer | Jan 5, 2008 2:08:20 PM
The only insurance company I trust is USAA out of San Antonio. I gladly pay higher premiums to know that when I have a legit claim I don't have to get a lawyer to retrieve it.
Capital One I trust to a point because they are the most competent card company. I don't have to watch them 24/7 like the other card companies. But is mostly a trust in their competence, not their motives.
Posted by: Clyde | Jan 5, 2008 2:11:27 PM
The only insurance company I trust is USAA out of San Antonio. I gladly pay higher premiums to know that when I have a legit claim I don't have to get a lawyer to retrieve it.
Capital One I trust to a point because they are the most competent card company. I don't have to watch them 24/7 like the other card companies. But is mostly a trust in their competence, not their motives.
Posted by: Clyde | Jan 5, 2008 2:12:50 PM
Two new occasions to question trust:
FOX has censored Ron Paul (a REPUBLICAN) from their debates. Is this "Fair & Balanced"?
The AARP censored Dennis Kucinich from a debate about healthcare because he supports bringing outrageous costs down by making the sector non-profit.
I am noting these two examples because they are timely, not because I care about FOX or the AARP. (Spare Barry the diatribes about how evil FOX is ... we all know they are not a trustworthy media company.)
Posted by: D H | Jan 5, 2008 2:14:15 PM
