Can Technology Platforms Rebuild Trust After It’s Lost?
-
IntouchCX Team
Public trust in digital platforms has deteriorated amid growing scrutiny of harmful content and the influence of recommendation algorithms. Technology companies face increasing pressure to explain how their systems shape online participation and demonstrate that protecting people remains a priority alongside commercial growth.
The stakes extend across social media, gaming, dating apps, and online marketplaces, where people rely on digital services to connect with others. Artificial intelligence introduces further uncertainty about the authenticity of online content, raising questions about how platforms can maintain confidence in the spaces they create.
In an upcoming episode of Trust Issues, hosted by Ailís Daly, Head of Trust & Safety at WebPurify, an IntouchCX company, journalist and technology entrepreneur Mark Little joins the conversation. The founder of Storyful and co-founder of Kinzen, who also held executive roles at Twitter and Spotify, draws on his experience inside the technology industry and his book, The Last Good Day on the Internet, to examine how the internet arrived at this point.
Ahead of the November 10 release, their conversation invites technology leaders to reconsider what earns public confidence and the role Trust & Safety professionals can play in shaping the next chapter of the internet.
Why Have Digital Platforms Lost Public Trust?
The early promise of social media centered on connection and discovery. People could participate in conversations beyond their immediate surroundings and find communities built around shared interests. These opportunities helped establish digital platforms as an important part of everyday life.
Public confidence in the information platforms carry remains low when it is measured against other places people get information. A Pew Research Center survey of U.S. adults, conducted in September 2026, found that 38% of respondents have a lot of or some trust in information from social media sites, compared with 62% for national news organizations and 75% for local news organizations. The comparison shows that services built to connect people have not earned the same confidence as the outlets that report on them, which raises the question of how platform design choices shaped that relationship.
The introduction of increasingly personalized recommendation systems changed how people encountered information. Rather than relying primarily on the accounts or communities they chose to follow, users began receiving content selected through algorithms designed to anticipate their interests and sustain engagement.
That evolution also raised questions about the influence platforms have over public conversations. Decisions about what receives greater visibility affect how information circulates, particularly when controversial material attracts significant attention.
Trust & Safety teams operate within this environment, addressing harmful activity while navigating the expectations of users who want greater accountability. Much of their protective work happens behind the scenes, leaving the public with limited visibility into the decisions that help keep online spaces safe.
Platforms must protect sensitive enforcement processes while giving people enough information to understand how their services operate. Little has experienced these pressures from inside technology companies and through his work examining the evolution of social media. The upcoming Trust Issues conversation explores how the relationship between platforms and the people who use them has changed, and what that history reveals about the possibility of rebuilding trust.
Can Platforms Move Beyond the Age of Attention?
Engagement metrics have shaped the commercial priorities of digital platforms for years. Time spent online and repeat visits offer measurable indicators of activity, influencing how companies evaluate performance and develop new features.
However, sustained activity does not necessarily indicate that people feel satisfied with their time online. A platform can encourage prolonged browsing without strengthening the relationships that give users a reason to return.
This creates a difficult question for technology leaders: how should they measure success when the amount of attention a service receives tells them relatively little about the value people gain from participating?
Recommendation systems sit at the center of that debate. They can introduce people to relevant information and unfamiliar interests, but the objectives behind those recommendations determine what receives priority. Users also have different expectations about how much influence they should have over the content presented to them.
Heavy use and agreement about how feeds should work are two different measurements, and the available polling shows how far apart they sit. A 2026 YouGov poll of 1,116 U.S. adult citizens, conducted in August 2026, found that 73% of Americans spend more than an hour on social media on a typical day, yet 46% would prefer posts arranged chronologically while 26% prefer posts sorted by an algorithm. Adults under 30 lean the other direction, with 31% preferring chronological feeds and 43% preferring algorithmic ones. The split shows that high engagement leaves the question of how content should be selected unresolved, which makes the objectives behind recommendations a leadership decision.
Little believes the internet is approaching a turning point, one that could move platforms beyond the age of attention toward what he calls an age of intention.
The concept challenges established assumptions about digital engagement and raises questions about how companies can respond to changing expectations without abandoning the benefits of personalized technology.
What would that transition mean for platforms whose business models have been built around capturing attention? The upcoming episode examines why this shift is central to the internet’s future.
What Will It Take for Trust & Safety to Influence Business Decisions?
Trust & Safety professionals have firsthand knowledge of the risks that emerge when platform features are introduced or existing systems change. Their work gives them a perspective on how product decisions affect the people who rely on digital services.
Yet safety considerations can compete with commercial pressures, particularly when companies prioritize rapid launches and immediate engagement. Specialists brought into the process after major design decisions have been made face the difficult task of addressing risks within systems they had limited influence over.
This tension has become increasingly relevant as regulatory expectations evolve. The European Union’s Digital Services Act establishes obligations for covered online services, including requirements related to transparency and illegal content. Designated very large online platforms and search engines must also assess and mitigate systemic risks.
Enforcement of the Digital Services Act now carries financial consequences that executives can quantify. The European Commission reports that it has designated 25 very large online platforms and 3 very large online search engines, and its enforcement framework states that a fine for a breach may reach 6% of a provider’s global annual turnover. A penalty can give business leaders a concrete reason to bring trust and safety expertise into product decisions before a regulator raises concerns.
Together, these obligations and penalties have increased the importance of involving trust and safety expertise in business decisions. They also raise a question about what happens beyond regulatory compliance: can companies recognize the commercial importance of user protection before external pressure forces them to act?
The conversation with Little will examine the position of Trust & Safety within technology organizations and the influence these professionals need to shape decisions at the executive level. It also introduces an unexpected perspective on risk. What if assuming the worst possible outcome were one of the most constructive ways to prepare for the future?
Can We Build an Internet People Want to Trust Again?
AI is changing the conditions under which people participate online. Generative systems can produce convincing material at scale, making questions about authenticity increasingly important for platforms responsible for maintaining trustworthy environments.
The implications extend beyond identifying misleading content. People also need confidence in the communities they join and the relationships they develop through digital services.
This creates a broader question about the future of online participation: If automated content becomes a larger part of the internet, what will make spaces built around genuine human connection valuable to the people using them?
Smaller communities organized around shared interests offer one perspective on how online participation is evolving. Their members establish expectations about who belongs and how conversations should develop, creating a different dynamic from the large public feeds that have defined much of social media.
For technology companies, these changing preferences raise questions about the future of digital communities and the systems that support them. They also challenge established assumptions about how people want to engage with the internet and what this could mean for the next generation of platforms and the role trust and safety professionals have in shaping what comes next.
The Future of Digital Trust
Rebuilding public confidence requires technology companies to examine the relationship between their business priorities and the environments they create. Decisions about recommendation systems and community safeguards influence how people participate, making Trust & Safety expertise increasingly relevant to long-term platform strategy.
For leaders, the immediate priority is to understand where commercial incentives create risks and whether the people responsible for protecting users have enough influence to address them. These questions deserve attention before new technologies introduce further complexity into existing systems.
Responding to these pressures also requires expertise in how harmful activity develops across digital environments. WebPurify, an IntouchCX company, works with platforms to address these risks through content moderation and tailored trust and safety strategies. That work supports the broader effort to protect online participation while helping organizations adapt to changing expectations.
The future of the internet remains open to choices about how technology serves people. Mark Little’s perspective offers an opportunity to examine those choices through the experience of someone who has helped build digital services and witnessed the consequences of their evolution.
On November 10, 2026, Season 2, Episode 3 of Trust Issues brings Little and Ailís Daly together to explore why public trust has eroded, what the next era of online participation could look like, and how Trust & Safety professionals can help shape it.
