> What's fascinating is that Google gets virtually zero recognition for this (Google services are largely taken for granted), and beyond that, Google is one of the most hated corporations for it.

I feel like this is some majorly false revisionist history. At least in my circles, Google was revered and lauded up until 2010-2012 or so, whenever enshittification started in earnest. And this isn't just some outsider opinion. Look at some of the original early Google communication where they highlighted how their ads were always separate and easily identifiable from organic results, and how that eroded over the years. Heck, there was a front page article today on NYTimes, https://www.nytimes.com/2026/07/20/technology/google-ai-open..., talking about how Google used to be an "open Internet champion" and is now an "AI gatekeeper". Google's corporate ethos from their early years is basically unrecognizable today, and that's why people hate them.

The hate towards Google only started picking up steam as they snowballed into deciding (like pretty much all corporate enterprises) that growth at all costs is the only purpose of corporations, and when they became the poster child (rightfully so IMO) for surveillance capitalism.

▲

kccqzy 15 hours ago | parent [-]

The New York Times is actually part of the reason why Google’s reputation went downhill. Somewhere around 2010–2015, the NYT and other traditional newspapers finally woke up and realized that their traditional job of disseminating information to the masses had been supplanted by a new generation of tech companies including Google and Meta. So the NYT and other newspapers soured their opinions around the time. If you read the NYT, just like many intellectuals do for priding themselves for reading a serious publication, your opinions of Google would have drastically changed around that timeframe too.

However among my circle of friends (who are in general not readers of the NYT), the main reason Google became hated was shutting down products (starting from Reader, culminating in Inbox) and launching duplicative products (how many chat apps did Google have). The hate had absolutely nothing to do with surveillance capitalism. If anything people hated Meta for that; Google’s role in surveillance capitalism was basically nil compared to Meta.

▲

dansquizsoft 11 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Off-topic somewhat, but NYT once tried to convince their readers to call Elizabeth Holmes "Liz" and not send her to jail after her fraud conviction. The implication being that it was a highly paid puff piece. They lost a lot of credibility with me that day.

	▲	khurs an hour ago \| parent [-]
		What the media stay silent on is often worse than what they publish. Media is materially controlled by the state in each county, some hide it very well.

▲

atomicfiredoll 14 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

- Shutting down products.

- Shutting down accounts with almost no way to recover them and nobody to talk to.

- Going back on promises of unlimited storage when you buy their products, then constantly nagging you about storage space.

- The worsening quality of search results.

- Cramming incorrect AI answers into the top of their search results, or pushing it in other products.

- Using their control over Chrome to try and end ad blocking.

- The wholesale enshittification and lobotomization of YouTube.

- They have $1800 phones they're putting restrictions around being able to run your own code on.

- The fact that when you search an app in the Play store, the first result is an ad for some other app.

- Their UIs is just death by 10,000 papercuts in general.

- Their engagement in politics, not just lobbying but a donation of $1 million to the inauguration fund for a wildly unpopular president.

[Modern] Google is a big company, with a lot of users, and more than enough problems for those users to eventually stumble into at least one thing that leaves a bad taste in their mouth.