In Apple battle, Google glides as Facebook fumes
Following Apple’s announcement that it will begin enforcing opt-in permissions for tracking in iOS 14, Facebook’s growing frustration with the iPhone maker has reportedly led the social network to want to “inflict pain” on Apple which, in the iPhone, controls one of the most important mobile platforms for Facebook’s apps. Apple’s moves come amidst an escalating campaign advocating privacy that the company has addressed via technology, policies, and advertising, and which has recently extended to decrying the threats of ad-driven social media business models.
Facebook, meanwhile, has continued to wrestle with banning, including allegations that it bent the rules for Alex Jones and other right-wing figures, whether its “content Supreme Court” will maintain a ban on Donald Trump, and a (lifted, for now) ban on Australians sharing news in response to legislation that would require negotiating licenses. With Facebook so perpetually enmeshed in controversy, does it have the popular support to mount an effective campaign against Apple?
n=500 U.S. adults weighted to U.S. Census
Question: For each of the following companies, please indicate how positive or negative an impact you think it has on society overall.
Key Stats
Nearly two out of five respondents say that Facebook has a negative impact on society with the majority of those describing a very negative impact. That’s the highest ratio recorded among the group of tech-related companies we presented to recipients.
However, Twitter notched a similar level of negative perception; this indicates that the perception is tied more strongly to Big Social Media in general than Facebook per se. In contrast, fewer than half as many respondents said that Apple or Google had a negative impact on society overall, a sentiment likely related to their association as “Big Tech” companies.
Google’s lack of unfavorable perception may in part be attributed to many people being unaware that it owns YouTube. While the video destination has also come under fire for moderation decisions, there may be recent occasions where Google has seen the failure of its social efforts like Google+ as a blessing in disguise.
Key Takeaways
Theater History
Facebook’s conflicts with Apple and Australia represent just the latest incidents in which Facebook has come under shared scrutiny, but where its reaction has been more extreme than Google’s. Regarding the Australian regulation, for example, while Google threatened to shut down search in the country in response to the terms, it acquiesced without doing so.
In terms of the Apple tracking changes, Google, like Facebook, offers some of the most popular apps on iOS and would be subject to the same opt-in requirements in iOS 14. And, like Facebook. Google is preparing partners about the coming changes. However, unlike Facebook, Google will forgo tracking methods for which Apple requires opting in as it continues to develop new tools such as Privacy Sandbox as it prepares to sunset support for third-party cookies.
Searching for Friends
Why is Google able to navigate these kinds of challenges with less disruption and outcry than Facebook offers? First, as a platform owner itself, Google has a vested interest in asserting that the provider of, say, the Google Play store, has the right to set rules for how apps must present themselves. (Those could include similar arguments to ones that might be made by the provider of, say, the Oculus store.)
Furthermore, Google has nothing to gain by earning the ire of Apple, a company that Google believes provides $12 billion of value for ownership of the search bar on devices that appeal to a highly desirable audience. Even discounting last year’s cancelled Google I/O developer event, the number of potshots Google has taken at Apple has dropped dramatically since the launch of Google’s first-party device efforts. Google understands that Apple has more than sufficient web surfing knowledge about its users to “go Apple Maps” on Google’s search features and launch a homegrown search engine at any time.
Finally, there’s the argument that Google’s — or Alphabet’s — business has become slightly more diversified than Facebook’s, but it’s not to the point where a dramatic fall-off in advertising wouldn’t hurt Google. While some of Alphabet’s long bets like Verily may be delivering profit, others have splashed down.
In contrast, with Facebook having so far made an unconvincing argument that Apple’s moves would hurt small businesses, it’s difficult to see what implement of pain infliction it might use beyond antitrust lobbying, a strategy that would surely further scrutiny of its own market position. Facebook has appeared to flirt with joining the Coalition for App Fairness led by Epic Games, to which it has lent public support, but is pursuing its regulatory and legal agendas in Europe and the U.S. alone for now.
Related Commentary
No about-face. The stark difference between public sentiment toward Facebook and Google has existed for years. In 2017, before even news of the Cambridge Analytica scandal broke, we teamed up with The Verge to create the first edition of The Verge Tech Survey that showed a far higher affinity for Google than Facebook.
Breaking up is hard to do. Cognitive dissonance may play a role in consumers higher esteem of Google. Many would find it far harder to quit Facebook and Instagram than do without the popular services Google provides. In 2018, I posited that these services create an emotional connection to the brand.
Apple as the Internet’s Grim Reaper. What would justify Facebook inflicting pain on Apple (which it would be hard-pressed to do beyond anti-trust lobbying that could seem hypocritical)? The answer, according to Facebook, is that Apple is “killing the Internet,” an accusation we discussed in a December episode of the Techspansive podcast.
About R3
The Reticle Research Report (R3) presents and analyzes exclusive, original, proprietary, timely, and independent research about topical tech industry issues. Delivered 40 times per year to tech economy stakeholders, it combines the insights of a syndicated research service with the accessibility of a newsletter. R3 is the flagship offering of Reticle Signature. We invite you to learn more about our offerings.
R3 is being made available free for a limited time as a preview. To share feedback, suggest a colleague who might want to receive R3, or explore any topic discussed in the newsletter for custom research, please email info@reticlereserach.com.
About Ross Rubin
Ross Rubin is the founder and principal analyst at Reticle Research and the editor of R3. The former chief research fellow at Jupiter Research (acquired by Forrester Research) and executive director at The NPD Group, he has been a technology industry analyst for over 20 years and developed services delivering insights at four technology market research firms. He is also a contributor to ZDNet and Fast Company and co-hosts the Techspansive podcast.