Do you buy products with particular certifications (fair trade, free range, etc.), even if they cost more?
|Why or why not?|
Do you use technology even if it has a "bad" or "mixed" reputation? (Uber's corporate problems, the working conditions at Apple's factories, etc.)
|Why or why not?|
Would an evidence-based "trustworthy tech mark" help you decide what kind of digital products and services to buy?
|Why or why not?|
What kinds of standards do you think "trustworthy" technology should meet? (Fair pay for workers, clear terms and conditions, etc.?)
Anything else you want us to know as we explore trustworthy technology?
i am lucky to be able to afford to buy this sort of product. I believe providers who are pioneering this sort of thing deserve support
sometimes the alternative is too difficult/expensive. I avoid these when I can. but eg lost in foreign city, i will uber if need be
just like fair trade helps me pick food this would help me pick apps etc
Establishes ideas that certain values are regulated (safety, hygiene)
Differentiation in the market place. I have a value-based approach to goods (is it an independent company, are they clear on their use of data)...
Clear T&Cs, human/easy to understand communications.
To signal to retailers and producers that investing in worthwhile causes is important.
It depends on whether I can avoid it or not, I use Apple products because there are no ethical alternatives that also work really well. Esp at work I cannot afford to use unreliable software or hardware that makes my job difficult. I do refuse however to use the unethical products or services where there are some alternatives available. I do not use Uber or Deliveroo, but I can choose to move around differently and get my food using alternative methods.
I am well versed in which tech companies are trustworthy. I know all the industry gossip, and being connected and critical means I understood the nature of Uber or Deliveroo as businesses well before the public had access to any reporting on their nature.
Clarity around data collection and usage, fair pay for not just workers but also people deemed contractors, independent review of ethics and security. (Uber and Deliveroo still insist their workforce aren’t a true workforce, hence “worker” is a fuzzy term in case of tech companies)
Depends on the mark - some, like organic certification, are just marketing schemes and do not necessarily mean what the consumer thinks. Fair Trade can also be a problem eg fixed price FT contracts sometimes see farmers being paid less than market rate for goods.
On an individual basis, I weigh up the net gain to me personally or society as a whole of the product or service against the problems of production. It is nearly impossible to buy without there being some ethical issue somewhere up the chain, compounded by changing definitions of eg what constitutes a sweat shop, what is a fair wage locally (rather than using UK standards).
If truly evidence based then yes, although I think it's more useful as an incentive to manufacturers to improve their processes. But where there are unethical working conditions there is usually also fraud. As it's notoriously difficult to get reliable assurances from developing world contractors, I would require a very high standard of evidence to trust any such mark.
I would ideally want: no child labour; LOCAL fair pay (not based on British ideas of fair pay); zero use of slavery techniques eg keeping passports; investment in local infrastructure.
The environmental impact of the tech
Fair pay. Financial transparency re tax. No collaboration with dubious governments & organisations.
Too many tech companies ignore the issues their technology creates
Clear privacy statements, workers employed rather than "contractors", no attempt to use loopholes to work around the spirit of existing legislation (eg uber and taxi licencing, airbnb and hotel safety requirements)
Want to make sure that commodities are priced fairly
If I decide that a company is scum I won't give them money (e.g. Ryanair)
It has to be based on full design, build, supply chain etc right back to raw material. Few would meet it to begin with, all could be embarrassed by not meeting it.
It has to be based on full design, build, supply chain etc right back to raw material. Few would meet it to begin with, all could be embarrassed by not meeting it.
Align with priority of consumers, ensure no false equivalence and no perverse incentives
Pursuit of cheapest products hurts people and planet.
Human abuses by Apple and similar are not acceptable and I do not buy.
If I understood your rationale, I would use it.
Fair tax paid in correct countries (see recent Oxfam report on how corporate tax evasion affects the poorest countries). Ethical supply chain (see Fairphone).
Please, please, please take a good look at Fairphone. Their ethical supply chain for electronics seems like a ray of light in a very dark industry.
Convenience outweighs purity
use of data, corporate ethics (tax, staff, finances), environmental sustainability
Don't overcomplicate it. Simple, baseline standard. 10 or 12 important things you can reasonably expect as a consumer/buyer.
It's good to support initiatives like these where possible
No to Uber, because there are alternatives that aren't based on aggressive, damaging business models (like the bus, or regular taxis, or cycling or the tube) but yes for Apple because all computers are manufactured in similar conditions, and the items are so expensive even if someone manufactured one ethically I can't imagine the price being competitive.
In theory yes, the idea is good. However it sounds a lot like a marketing gimmick where products just get branded with "natural" or "new and improved" and I'd be suspicious of the criteria and motivations of the awarding body if it wasn't something I was already aware of.
I have no idea. Again the nuance here is difficult: what's fair pay if you live in Indonesia and the GNI is 8% of that in the UK? I can't even conceive of a T&C statement that is clear - I'm not aware of any technology products that have one, nor can I remember the last time I read one that I then accepted.
Because either those "certifications" are meaningless, such as organic, or I disagree with the premise the certification is supporting, such as fair trade.
The bad side-effects of products matter a lot to me.
I really need a maybe option here because it depends on the factors considered and how legitimate the system is in developing and applying the mark.
Clear terms; not saving any personal data; not using personal data to the advantage of the company, i.e. not improving software, not being guinea pigs; putting the customer before product growth; trustworthiness in the actual sense of the word in being honest, reliable that what is said is kept to, etc.; no forced updates; the ability to purchase (rather than subscribe to) the software needed to run the product so that as a consumer you have some control over your technology; no backdoors, esp not for gov; ability to control settings and what else is accessed such as location, contacts, etc.
how the company respects consumers matters more than employees. With modern tech, consumers often have less choices in devices they need for work and life than employees do in where they work.
If there isn't a huge cost difference, I will often choose the one that appears to be more environmentally or ethically minded. Particularly if I know the industry and am familiar with typical practices. But not if I'm aware the "standard" is mostly industry marketing (mostly applies to food.)
I'd rather keep my career than choose to boycott Apple over something that is an industry-wide problem that they seem to be at least trying to address. Other times I pay attention to what the company (both exec team and employees) do/say. Particularly in tech, where I know very well what is going on.
But only if I were confident it was a neutral source of information.
No secret data collection, human-readable user agreements, safe and fair workplaces, no suppression of collective bargaining, no hiding behind abusive sub-contractors.
I am mixed about certain aspects of tech companies agreeing to the policies of authoritarian countries in order to sell there. At minimum, I expect them to be transparent about it.
Fairness to human beings and animals. I vote with my feet against unfair practices if I know there is an issue and a choice. I'm also privileged enough to have disposable income that allows me to make that choice.
I chose not to but sometimes there appears little difference in suppliers. Or I have to use the products as they're work provided.
Saves me time on research and gives me some assurance that the products are fair.
Fair pay, clear terms, best practice environmentally, ethical use of data.
Many people don't know there are issues here. As much as needing to do something to fix them, awareness of that they exist needs raising.
Like to purhcase items ethically
Sometimes I'm not aware of "bad"/"mixed" reputations
Yes, but depends on what "trustworthy" means
Good working conditions & pay, sustainably produced, value for money
Belief that the product is indeed better for the environment, and I like to be responsible in that sense, if possible and affordable.
Not a simple yes or no. I make my own tradeoffs here. If possible I avoid bad companies, but I also think it is not always so simple.
All information that can be trusted will help to make better decisions.
Respect for people, both users as society. Transparency indeed. How to execute in detail requires more thinking.
The trust in the certification is key too. Is it enforced by a trustworthy organisation? Or is it a set of rules that are so obvious it can be controlled by the people? Compare it to the food and sustainable certifications. There are so many of them and some are genuine, others are pure marketing tools...
Also, probably known, but consider to team up/tune with other initiatives like iotmark.org.
I usually go for the cheapest food I can buy so that I can get by.
I am not always aware of the 'bad' reputations about those companies.
When I buy a product, I would like to have a greater awareness of the history of that product.
|Fair pay for workers.|
being ethical is part of being a nice person
my mind is finite; it's easier to send some signals than others.
I have no idea, but Fairphone are doing good work.
privacy of data and secure comms. those are the battlegrounds. Roomba sells a map of your house. I can use "ok google" on my coworkers phone. My library has a record of every book and DVD I've ever borrowed.
I may sometimes buy these products if they look better (e.g. Organic veg), but the certification is not a factor.
These issues should be addressed by proper regulation, applied to all companies, not just those that gain notoriety online.
|Yes||Perhaps, see below.|
I would be concerned about fair terms and conditions, and factors such as the ability to use the device if the provider goes out of business (e.g. Dependence on vendor-provided cloud services should be clear).
I do not see the word "trustworthy" as suggestive of the supply chain issues described above, more about my ability to depend on the device over time.
Free-range is an easy way to make sure you're not causing suffering by using the label. Fair trade is less clear cut and I spend less time thinking about that. Does it mean that the workers aren't exploited?
It's nearly impossible to know the good/bad of everything and even then people have shades of what's good and bad. And of course stopping exploitation might damage people's livelihoods in the short term. It's all so far removed it's easier not to think too hard.
I don't even know what that means. Does it mean I trust it not to break and lose my work, or trust it to keep working and not become obsolete. Is it encryption? Privacy? NSA-proof? Blockchains or something?
Clear terms and conditions that primarily work for me as a user. Most of the time I don't read T&Cs because I know they're there for protecting the company and the asymmetry of the demand for the product vs my rejection of the terms means I'm the only one suffering. Bringing these to the fore like a nutritional marking at least gives us something to compare.
People just don't care enough these days. I used to home-assemble my complicated linux based TV or music servers or whatever but they always failed to work for some tiny esoteric reason which meant something to the bickering developers but didn't help me progress. Or I would find licensing and DRM restrictions and an industry hostile to open standards. In the end I just gave up and use consumer services which I know are evil but get the job done because the people I'm buying from (ent industry distributors and bureaucrats) are evil conduits to proper artists. The loss of open standards will be technology's downfall.
Seems that the certification might indicate a higher quality of product. Visibility of enforcement regime, and highly publicised sanctions for non-compliance, are helpful.
Fairly essential compromises of life in capitalism. However, opting out of some technologies - like mobiles - is rarely an option for most people: a digital hair shirt makes modern life more impossible that usual. Further, it seems that choosing an uncompromised alternative can often lead to disappointment when we find out they too are using poor labor conditions, or sexually harassing staff.
For products, probably assurances around labour conditions throughout the supply chain. We know complete transparency is possible, and we know that tech companies can leverage it - so why not? For services, trustworthy must relate to privacy/security concerns around the use of personally-identifying information. Also, trustworthy should mean submitting to and facilitating an effective compliance regime, rather than trying to subvert such a thing.
Thanks for doing this. It's much needed.
Want to make a difference in a simple way
The usefulness / uniqueness of the product
Diversity, employee treatment, contribution to society
I think in reality most of my products are certified because those are still the cheapest option I can get
I try to avoid it usually, but I value Apple products more than the issues they create I guess
Easy to know what to avoid
Pay & conditions of workers, mostly. Ethical storage and exploitation of data.
I try to opt for UK based, or at least smaller companies if possible.
I want to know that I'm supporting good practices for the world and I'm ingesting or using things that are sustainable or good for my body
Convenience and price are the biggest reasons why. Sometimes I think there's no chance they are going away so might as well take advantage
There's no transparency in digital services and it would be great to fully understand the implications of use
fair pay, clear T&Cs, location of workers/servers etc, tax avoiders, does it use advertising / how does it make money (ie if yes, they might optimise for engagement which can be manipulative)
I think exploring the advertising-based model is a big factor in digital manipulation. We are changing the world and habits this way without realising it. How can we old organisations to account?
As I know it is ethically and sustainably sourced.
Habits, especially with Apple products.
As I would then know that the peoplr who actually put the thing together received a fair deal for it and aren't being taken advantage of.
Fair pay, quality healthcare, paid family leave, safe conditions, possibly education in the local area
This is a good idea, as it raises morally sensitive topics, and that only serves to increase fairness as the debate is debated.
I think it helps - and talking to a naturalist from India convinced me it does
Not enough other options, and also I think the reputation of some is unfair - I don't think Apple is worse than other tech manufacturers, just bigger. Some isn't, though - Uber really are unethical IMO.
It might help making decisions
Fair practices across its supply chain. No DRM or lock-in technology, so you can get your own data out any time, that sort of thing.
Good luck! I worry you may find it's hard to do this in a politically neutral way.
interested in how things are made, and small incremental steps towards a fairer world
Often because it's really hard to sort through what lies behind a particular purchase. It's much harder thing than free range eggs or barn raised eggs - in the egg example you're comparing like with like, but comparing an android phone or an apple phone means a whole different operating system, rebuying core apps, and no real evidence that things are being made in a more ethical way.
transparency is always good, and having information to discuss these information knowledgeably will help
for hardware: treating workers fairly, ensuring their jobs do not affect their health, ensuring the environment is being looked after while raw materials are mined, and effluents from manufacture are cleaned up.
For software: treating developers fairly, ethical and transparent marketplace for software (not the same as a totally open marketplace),
For end users: human readable T&C bullet points, transparency on manufacturing policies, routes to recycle obsolete technologies
I was peripherally involved in the efforts in the last few years to set up a fair trade certification scheme for gold and diamonds, which was an enormously complex process in a historically very secretive industry with many entrenched interests pushing against it
Might be worth a look as a comparative study
Occasionally yes. Having an understanding that some certifications benefit communities is worth the extra money. However, there is a limit to the extra i'm willing to pay (+10-15%)
At the end of the day all organisations have problems. Its the problem with mass consumerisation unfortunately. If a product or service is designed well and does what it's designed to with minimal fuss then I'm more inclined to use it over a bad or mixed review of the company.
I have a strong tech background, I'll make my own decision on whether to buy a service or product.
I don't think this is an option I'd consider looking at based on my previous responses.
I don't think there are any many organisations which are truly trustworthy. I think it would end up being targeted as a "trust this" service for users who aren't tech savvy, ie, pensioners. Which is a risk that they end up being sold/recommended something which may not be suitable for them. I think it's a risky area to venture in to.
|7/25/2017 12:26:22||Yes||Assume better quality||Yes||Convenience||Yes|
Don't have the time/expertise to ascertain myself
Data protection, interoperability, legacy support
In the hope that this will inspire development of more fair products and improve quality of life for the animal, farmer or workers associated with the product.
In some cases these services provide services that I have typically been excluded from or I don't have an alternative for. I look and advocate for improvements on the problem areas.
Maybe - I should be using a FairPhone but while it is fail it is far from convenient and useable. I would certainly take it into account but it needs a simultaneous comparison to the best available in that class.
Fair and ethical labour, environment and consumer
I like to support ethical consumerism where I can, and not let my money fund things I disagree with
It depends what the issue is and what alternatives there are. I have deleted Uber and Deliveroo for example for the below living wage payment of workers, plus I think the on-demand economy risks segregating society even more than it already is (I don't know any poor people who use those two apps, for example). Apple is a tricky one, because they aren't the only big tech hardware company guilty of contracting to Foxxconn and the like, and while that is clearly bad, I applaud their stand on personal data privacy. Also a Macbook is considerably easier to write code on than a PC!
I already rely on Ethical Consumer's ethiscore to make most of my brand purchasing decisions. They already cover quite a bit of tech and have an established reputation and audience that it would be worth you tapping into.
Again, see EC's ethiscore. I particularly like the way you can select different levels on issues that you feel more or less strongly about to get your own personalised list of the best/worst companies.
Digital-specific things you could add to EC's rating could include: ethical design (dark patterns, intrusive push notifications, addictiveness etc.) that doesn't disempower users, safeguarding/anti-harassment policies (esp. for social media apps), ethical data policies, raw material sourcing for hardware, diversity and gender/race representation in company HQ (and beyond)
Because I think it's right for people & animals to have rights, and I like to use my purchasing power to send that message
Sometimes, but usually less than I would otherwiss
If it was clear what kind of
Conflict, corruption, and environmental degradation free raw materials. Reasonable conditions (not just pay but working hours etc) for workers.
There's a difficulty in moving from single issue labelling (fair trade, free range, etc) to a general certification as you then mix up a load of different issues on the assumption that people feel the same about all of them. I suggest not trying to mix up too many different things in there.
I buy on quality, I'm not really price or certification sensitive.
Reputations are a matter of press not always reality. I wouldn't use Uber because of their real problem whereas I would buy Apple because their factories are as good and probably better than most (and I have audited a couple of their suppliers so...)
But strongly depends on what 'trustworthy' meant and who was doing the certification and how they were doing it.
Very hard to define in a few words. I'd like to see privacy, respect for users' data, secure products, real 'green' standards (not ISO14000 which is so much wasted paper), deep supply chain auditing and yes, decent conditions (including pay) for workers.
It'd be good to see at a glance how easy (or not) it is to repair a product and how long the s/w will be properly supported (i.e. it'll keep running reasonably and not just about work but slowly clog the h/w as the updates become bloatware).
I don't know about the certifications or why they are valuable
Varies. Uber no, Apple yes. Scandal isn't binary
Maybe. A score is better than a binary mark. If I disagree on one product ranking, the entire brand goes
|Security, privacy, interoperable|
I think it's important to shop as ethically as you can afford to (I'm aware that this isn't always an affordable option for people)
I try not to but I do sometimes, mainly because I assume that there isn't always an ethical option so you have to use the least bad one. I don't use Uber or Apple but I'm sure some of the brands I use are also harmful. I am looking into getting a Fairphone but until I can do that I assume that whatever I get will be unethical in some way!
I wouldn't be confident that I could research everything myself. Some issues are easy to think of e.g. how companies treat staff, how much they damage the environment, but I'm sure there are things I wouldn't even think of.
A living wage, safe working conditions, minimal damage to the environment, not dealing with organisations that don't meet their own standards, advertising that is not offensive (racist, sexist, ablist, homophobic, transphobic, ageist, classist etc). Also committing to improving the world in some way.
If I believe in the certification, the price seems fair, and the technology meets my requirements
Puts me off (Uber, Alexa) if I haven't already adopted, doesn't sadly pull me off an existing technology (Apple) if I'm already an enthusiastic user :-(
Outsources the decision making process!
Fair pay, lower environmental impact, recycling facilities, clear and fair and short T&C that I could actually feasibly read and understand, good working conditions for workers, payment of taxes, companies not attempting to disproportionately affect legislation in their favour
|7/25/2017 21:05:52||Yes||Some assurance of quality||Yes|
I try not to, so a reluctant 'yes'. I avoid uber but apple so integrated into our tech ecosystem, its difficult not to
It would make decisions easier
Fair employment terms ethical standards
In the end no one benefits if we screw over the source of our food.
Often it's because they have an entrenched position which means taking a stand could make professional life exceptionally difficult.
I think it would encourage people to realise that there is such a thing as untrustworthy tech. It's amazing how much power tech companies have which is unchecked.
Plain english terms and conditions which can't be changed without explicit consent. Clear ways to remove your data from the platform - independently vetted. Security procedures to ensure employees don't have undue access to data.
There is also the thorny issue of government intelligence requirements. It worries me more that they will force back doors into software and pass ever increasingly strong legislation that actually does nothing to prevent terrorism or fight crime but in fact creates fantastic opportunities for criminals to exploit.
Because if I can afford it, then it's only fair to try and contribute to promoting better options.
Often because there are few alternatives, and it's not as easy to find that kind of info on tech. It's not as traceable as food for example. I don't really use things like uber, deliveroo, because I don't need them in my life - they're just about convenience, not really necessary for everyday living. But I do use the obvious Facebook, Google, etc, like most people, even though I don't like how much power they have over our data. I refused to own a smart for a long time, but have to travel a lot for work, so recently bought a recycled fairphone. It would be great if more of those alternatives were available for laptops / other devices or apps.
It would definitely help with devices, but I don't see how it could work for apps as most are 'free'. I don't know if the mark wouldn't be sufficient enough incentive for them, as they have become ubiquitous and monopolise the market. But from a consumer perspective, yes, would be great!
Hardware produced in a sustainable way and easily recyclable. For apps, clear understanding of where my data goes and how it's used. For both, ethical working practices.
Who produces tech (ie: not much diversity in the sector)
Often I don't know the details of the apparent unethical conditions
|7/25/2017 22:24:18||Yes||Even a small act can help||Yes|
Lack of choice/alternatives/full and clear knowledge of impact of choice
Power of crowd will force change
Clear t&cs - and short! Fair and equitable treatment of employees, fair pay, clarity over ethics, clarity over use of data
Makes me feel better about things I consume
Lack of choice to do otherwise
Yes, but it'd only be part of the decision. But more evidence is good.
Clear limits on use of personal data. Clear evidence of humane production. Stuff that we shouldn't have to ask for but do.
Usually there's a personal ethical dimension to it — I buy free-range eggs and sustainably grown coffee for this reason. I know in the grand scheme of things one person's personal purchasing decisions don't really amount to much, but it still gives me a good feeling. Sometimes these certifications are incidental, though, and I just feel like they're a better product overall.
I use Uber much less now than I used to — I've been keeping track of their reputation in the tech and broader press for a while now, and am generally pretty suspicious of companies (usually startups) that outsource all the risk to a precarious contracting workforce. Sometimes it does feel like a much better option from a service point of view, though (e.g. travelling in a new country), and I find it much easier to keep a digital "paper trail" for work and project expenses.
The problems in tech manufacturing are much harder to grapple with — it's somewhere between hard and impossible for me to do my job without buying a re-buying tech every few years. I don't think this is particular to Apple — they've just got the biggest profile — but I would like a bit more visibility in this space, in terms of supply chain, working conditions and processes, etc.
I'd look at something like this, and weigh it up when making a purchase or signing up to a service, but I'm usually a little suspicious of programs like this — in a lot of other industries, they seem to get watered down or co-opted by the industry they're supposed to be helping you navigate.
If it's a genuinely independent, transparent system (eg: https://tosdr.org! I love this service!), I'd be more interested.
On the T&Cs side, be clear and transparent about:
- Who (in the company, and third parties incl advertisers and governments) has access to my data when I use the service.
- How can I deactivate/delete my account? What happens to my data when I do?
- If the T&Cs are going to change, let me know ahead of time, and explain in clear language what is changing and why
- How secure is the data I store with you? In which jurisdiction it is stored? What kind of data breaches have you had in the past, and how were they addressed?
On the workers rights side:
- Where is your product (hardware or software) made?
- What are the working conditions like? How does the pay compare to the average for that kind of work in that location? Do you have a gender-based wage gap?
- What are you doing, as a company, to address systematic inequalities in your field of work? What are your hiring initiatives that target women and people of colour? More importantly, what are your retention rates after a year or more for those groups?
Data privacy feels massively under-discussed at the moment, and I think there's a way to talk about it that looks critically at the benefits and tradeoffs around what happens when large batches of user or customer data are collected, repurposed, bought & sold, etc (most recent example I can think of: https://www.gizmodo.com.au/2017/07/roombas-next-big-step-is-selling-maps-of-your-home-to-the-highest-bidder/)
Usually a quality product and you can buy with a clear conscience that there's not plunder, extortion, poor conditions and environmental damage involved. In terms of product kitemarks, that they're safe or approved
Lack of choice, difficult to access alternatives
Assurety but it's difficult to say what the ultimate buying decision would be made on. If there was a kite mark for a product that met certain security requirements with regard to my data that would be more useful than just trusting they're not breaking the law or being negligent. And in a way knowing who unethical offenders are so you can avoid them might be more useful than approving people you're not necessarily going to buy from because they're not easily available.
Proper processes in place for data storage and security, good explanations of the product and changes made (open working), fair conditions for staff and suppliers
|Not right now|
|7/26/2017 8:16:44||Yes||Better for the world||Yes||Functionality||Yes|
Decent pay; repairability; sustainability; ethical sourcing; clarity on use of data; privacy
I want to make better, more ethical choices about the things I buy and certifications/badging is a relatively easy way to identify a better choice, even if it's not perfect.
I think everyone has a line that they draw for themselves personally about what they feel ok using. I don't use Uber and haven't since stories emerged a couple of years ago about the disregard with which they treat both drivers and passengers. But I do still use Apple products. I don't agree with the working conditions in their factories but I don't feel that other computer/smartphone manufacturers are necessarily better. Sometimes a boycott isn't the answer to making things better, especially when there isn't a great alternative available to use.
I'm sure it would have an influence on me if it was clearly backed up by evidence and by a trustworthy organisation. Badging like this is never perfect but I think overall it helps to raise awareness in people's minds of the issue as well having a positive effect on some choices.
I think a lot about how the end user is being treated and how much control they have over what happens to their data. I think trustworthy tech standards would look at how easy it is for user's to remain in control their data and how transparent the company is on how data is used e.g. does anyone allow their algorithms to be audited?. I also think it would be important to consider the company's impact on people and planet - so how they treat their workers (both employed staff, itinerant workers and workers via a supply chain), whether they practice environmental/sustainable policies etc. For me personally those people & planet aspects feel more closely aligned to the concept of "fairness", which impacts "trust" but isn't the same thing - maybe that's a more personal/ philosophical distinction tho :)
I would consider how badging/certification can lead to false confidence as well. That feeling that "I bought free range/organic/fair trade so I'm doing ok and don't need to think about it anymore". Part of me feels that the tech industry has SO FAR to go when it comes to developing trustworthy practices - especially around use of data - that any badging might be in danger of sanctioning the least bad option.
Do not consider worth the inflated price
Not a big factor in my decisioning.
It easily helps me incorporate these factors into my decisioning model.
Fair Pay, not trying to screw customers over (EG Apple updating software to slow old hardware down, decent warranty terms, available contact centre for queries.
Can't think of an answer that isn't trite. Because I believe it's the right thing to do? Obviously we all have greater or lesser degrees - I'd never buy non free range eggs, I mainly buy Divine choc (fair trade and recyclable packaging) but sometimes buy other choc, I bought a Fairphone, because it is good to encourage businesses like that. I have an ethical pension. Whilst I think it is at large scale level that change will be effected, not small scale, that doesn't mean you shouldn't do what you can.
Again, this is a spectrum. I try not to, but I'm sure I fail. I don't use Uber, nor Amazon. I bought an Apple laptop in 2011 that still works fine, I probably won't replace it until it breaks. But any tech choice has some issue. I'm sure I use things that are bad/ mixed I don't know about.
I've said yes because the idea sounds okay (if it could be along FSC style) but to be honest, it'd be hard to know whether I could trust it or if it was just green washing. I would more likely trust e.g. ethical consumer ratings for technology or some mark from established orgs. If everything "passed" then it'd be worthless. If only Fairphone passed, then I already knew that. But if you could rank say whether Spotify, Play, Apple Music or Amazon were more worthy of £10/mth (assuming you're going to get it from *someone*) that would be useful, as to me nothing else would really differentiate them!
Ethical Consumer have this down in terms of the main categories - human rights, worker rights, armaments, supply chain, marketing, pollution, climate change, reporting. Sure, data protection/behaviour could be a useful added category (eg unroll.me), but the basics are still quite broad...
I believe we need to use our money to stimulate activity that is good for our world and good for people
Laziness. Attractiveness of the product.
I'm not sure what this would mean. And I am doubtful - kite mark schemes (if that is what it is) have a dubious pedigree
1. Giving ownership of personal data to the individual. 2. Absolute transparency on intent and ethical commitment to clear plain English ts and C's. Companies who publish their triple bottom line results openly (impact on shareholder return, on enviorinmebtal impact, and on people/communities).
I can afford to make ethical choices if I want to. I don't want my own purchase to negatively affect someone else in the world who's been involved in making it.
There's the dichotomy. I have always bought used Apple products. When this one dies I'm not sure if I'll do the same again.
Maybe. I don't know what that would really mean though. I mean, Fairphone, for example, have tried that but can they 100% confirm that they know exactly where everything in their supply chain comes from and the conditions and pay involved in sourcing every mineral?
Fair pay and contracts/working conditions, no death of animals involved in producing it or child labour, no destruction to the environment. Customer service should be a priority. Ts & Cs should be written in Layman's terms. In this day and age, they should be able to offset their carbon emissions too to get a mark like this.
Yes – planned obsolescence – I'd like to see a mark for any kind of technology to certify that you can replace nearly every part of said product via their company or another retailer. I am absolutely fed up of having to throw things away because a broken or missing part that I cannot replace renders an item useless. It is wasteful and damaging to the environment.
Firstly it's a moral thing - we should be treating producers and animals fairly as part of the food process. I try to care about what goes into my body... and the same goes for my family (possibly to a greater extent). As someone who cooks a lot I understand that treating both the producers and the animals well can massively impact on the flavour and quality.
There's a total lack of clarity on where products have been made, and how. Partly laziness on my part, partly a need due to my work to use certain tools - work provide me with a MacBook, my phone is a Google Nexus, we watch tv through an Amazon FireTV stick... - and partly, possibly most crucially, I don't think any of the tech giants are in the clear for their ethics. Amazon don't pay UK tax, etc. etc. but avoiding using any of their services (AWS, for example) is becoming virtually impossible.
I think if it gathered enough credence then the question would become "well why aren't Samsung phones accredited".
I'd love tax to be a factor here...
It opens up some very difficult questions - it should definitely cover employees working conditions and situations but not just fair pay. If the company is employing children, which is dubious but may also be the only way for some kids to get out of rough situations, are they also providing education, food, etc.
I suspect that adding an assurance of the standards will also mean a marked increase in price, partly as companies move away from poorer practices and partly as it's a marketing tool.
to support and grow that market
In case I really prefer their use/usability over alternatives
Partly, I would also need a place where these alternatives are offered side-to-side. In a supermarket you can easily compare alternatives before you pick. Online differences are often less obvious. It's not just price and quality, there are often more functional differences between the several options.
fair pay, clear terms, transparent earnings, data use, exits
Fair trade - no brainier really, pennies to me, big difference to producers. Free range - ditto. Minor hit to me for big win for other side if the bargain.
Not uber because habit and their bad rep, but I use Facebook and Google despite knowing they exploit my data/mind. Fbook - because it's handier to broadcast/receive aggregated stuff on that than individual friends contacts; Google cos it's free and works.
Ensure my data not sold. Cf roomba!
|Not selling my data!|
I like their products and like to support ethical consumerism
If I had to only select those companies which have no issues, it would be a very short list. Everyone has something, it is a question of degree.
I would like to think it would, but realistically, I don't think it would be my primary purchasing driver. Maybe a supplementary criteria.
A primary concern is fraud and selling data. Now that would make a difference to my purchasing decision
I want to use products that have had minimal bad impacts on the people, environments and communities involved in making them.
You can't live in a city without using some kind of morally compromised product. It's unavoidable.
It's often unclear how ethical or unscrupulous a brand is. Research into it is also often difficult.
Reliability of product, fair compensation for people involved in product, ethical gathering or resources used in production.
I think the name may be misleading.
Because it's convenient (Amazon). Because I don't know what else to do eg I feel guilty using amazon because warehouse labour practices, but I dont know if any other online retailer is any better. (But let's face it, that's an excuse I'm making, because it makes my life easier).
Because I can do the right thing without thinking.
Working conditions. Supply chain. Data usage/privacy.
Fair trade, living wage, environmental standards
because I'm doing ok and it's a way to give back.
Because that's what I'm provided with at and what others use (i.e. husband has an Apple phone), but I have never used Uber and I have not bought any Apple products for my own benefit.
It's a shorthand, which means I don't have to do the thinking. The only reason I know what I know is because of the news or what friends have told me. But knowledge is power and the easier it is to find out the better.
Fair pay, Fair sourcing, Fair pricing, customer support, don't sell data, connectivity (i.e. you can use it with other systems...unlike Apple)
I don't mind paying a bit more for my ethics, but I wouldn't want this to be taken advantage of in any way.
Just to be a more responsible consumer
Don't know every detail about corporate practices. If I did know, it would impact my decision to use that product or service
There are some products and services where I just don't have a choice in use
Fair and just work practices for employees, transparency eg. in some pricing, security, data security
Fair pay to workers, trust in CEO, privacy and handling of data, CSR
Fair terms for workers. Due diligence about environmental impact of the work