The 2025 version of the Axios Harris poll of brand reputation is out, and it shows a sharp decline in the reputation of Tesla and other Elon Musk-related brands, putting them among the lowest-ranked brands in America, largely due to the toxicity of Musk himself.
The Axios Harris Poll 100 ranks brand reputation of America’s 100 most visible companies, and asks a sample of thousands of Americans how they feel about each brand.
The survey is a collaboration between Axios and Harris that has been going on since 2019, though is based on 20 years of similar Harris Poll research before then, starting in 1999. It has developed its own reputation as a reliable way to take temperature of the American public’s opinion on various high profile brands.
It’s conducted through multiple samples of thousands of Americans, asking them what the most high-profile brands are, how familiar they are with those brands, and their opinions of those brands.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Tesla has been ranked in the survey many times over the years, with varying results. In the first poll in 2019, it ranked 42nd, with a brand score of 75.4 out of 100.
Since then, the company’s shine has started to tarnish, and it has been dropping in the rankings. 2022 saw a slight dip to #12 and a score of 79.5, but in 2023 Tesla took a huge hit, dropping a whopping 50 places in the rankings. Axios titled the poll the “year of the tarnished titans” partially due to Tesla’s huge drop.
But the drop didn’t stop there, as Tesla dropped another position in 2024, down to #63, but with a brand score that would still at least be a barely-passing grade (for a lenient teacher), at 72.5 out of 100.
But this year’s poll shows that things just continue to get worse, and in fact, the reputation damage is accelerating.
In 2025, Tesla dropped another 32 places into 95th place, and down to a brand score of 61.3, a huge numerical drop in both position and brand score.
#97 Meta (Facebook) – This feels self-explanatory, but just about everyone is unhappy with Facebook, for reasons with varying levels of rationality behind them.
#98 Twitter – Also run by Elon Musk, which has been flooded with Nazi rhetoric and disinformation after he wasted $44 billion and most of his time on it (though it consistently ranked poorly even before Musk’s takeover0.
#99 The Trump Organization – I mean, it has the name of the highest-profile traitor to Americaright there in the name.
#100 Spirit Airlines – The “most hated airline in America,” butt of innumerable jokes, with generally low levels of service.
SpaceX, the third company run by Musk on the list, also earned a low reputation score, ranking 86th with a score of 66.4.
Notably, there are several companies with bad reputations ranked above Tesla, many of which have had high-profile scandals either recently or that still loom large in the public consciousness.
For example, those in the title of this article: BP, which presided over the Deepwater Horizon oil spill; UnitedHealth, which is currently imploding and whose former CEO was recently murdered in broad daylight and lots of people kind of didn’t seem to mind it; and Temu, which has faced data privacy lawsuits and is the butt of many jokes for selling low quality products, on top of general anti-China sentiment.
For a few other names, another Chinese app, TikTok, is also ranked above Tesla. As is Fox Corporation, one of the largest purveyors of misinformation and causes of the political division we see in America today. And finally, Boeing, which spent last year wracked by scandals, yet is 7 places above Tesla on this year’s list.
Meanwhile, every other automaker on the list ranked higher than Tesla by at least 35 places (Ford, #60).
Electrek’s Take
So, the news is quite bad for Tesla. But why is Tesla ranked so low?
Well, as you may have divined from our repeated mention of a certain name, the primary reason is Tesla CEO Elon Musk.
As we’ve been warning people about for quite some time now, Tesla CEO Elon Musk is doing his best to completely destroy Tesla’s brand.
Musk has presided over an incredible amount of brand damage to Tesla, with the company ranking the lowest of any US EV brand in a recent survey. This negative perception seems to apply to pretty much any question asked about the brand, including its standout Supercharger network, which suggests that the reason isn’t anything to do with Tesla’s products.
As an EV publication, we have the same mission as Tesla – to advance sustainable transport. In order for that to happen, we obviously want the (formerly) largest EV company in the world to do its job the best it can.
The problem is, Musk doesn’t have that mission, and has been doing his best over the last year(s) to ruin Tesla’s brand perception with increasingly idiotic decisions, both in terms of his public advocacy and his work within Tesla.
Beyond politics, Musk’s leadership (or lack thereof) has also resulted in Tesla putting all of its effort into products that either don’twork or don’t sell, instead of focusing on Tesla’s strengths like its cost advantages and Supercharger network.
So, once again, this report shows the effect of the constant drumbeat of bad Tesla business moves and horrendous public behavior by the company’s CEO.
We’re not sure what’s going to make Tesla’s board (which have been dumping TSLA stock like mad) or shareholders wake up to Musk’s destruction of the company, but this report is just one more data point showing how severe the situation has gotten.
Charge your electric vehicle at home using rooftop solar panels. Find a reliable and competitively priced solar installer near you on EnergySage, for free. They have pre-vetted installers competing for your business, ensuring high-quality solutions and 20-30% savings. It’s free, with no sales calls until you choose an installer. Compare personalized solar quotes online and receive guidance from unbiased Energy Advisers. Get started here. – ad*
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Tesla has changed the meaning of “Full Self-Driving”, also known as “FSD”, to give up on its original promise of delivering unsupervised autonomy.
Since 2016, Tesla has claimed that all its vehicles in production would be capable of achieving unsupervised self-driving capability.
CEO Elon Musk has claimed that it would happen by the end of every year since 2018.
Tesla has even sold a software package, known as “Full Self-Driving Capability” (FSD), for up to $15,000 to customers, promising that the advanced driver-assist system would become fully autonomous through over-the-air software updates.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
Almost a decade later, the promise has yet to be fulfilled, and Tesla has already confirmed that all vehicles produced between 2016 and 2023 don’t have the proper hardware to deliver unsupervised self-driving as promised.
Musk has been discussing the upgrade of the computers in these vehicles to appease owners, but there’s no concrete plan to implement it.
While there’s no doubt that Tesla has promised unsupervised self-driving capabilities to FSD buyers between 2016 and 2023, the automaker has since updated its language and now only sells “Full Self-Driving (Supervised)” to customers:
The fine print mentions that it doesn’t make the vehicle “autonomous” and doesn’t promise it as a feature.
In other words, people buying FSD today are not really buying the capability of unsupervised self-driving as prior buyers did.
One of these milestones is Tesla having “10 Million Active FSD Subscriptions.”
At first glance, this would be hopeful for FSD buyers since part of Musk’s compensation would be dependent on delivering on the FSD promises.
However, Tesla has changed the definition of FSD in the compensation package with an extremely vague one”
“FSD” means an advanced driving system, regardless of the marketing name used, that is capable of performing transportation tasks that provide autonomous or similar functionality under specified driving conditions.
Tesla now considers FSD only an “advanced driving system” that should be “capable of performing transportation tasks that prove autonomous or similar functionality”.
The current version of FSD, which requires constant supervising by the driver, could easily fit that description.
Therefore, FSD now doesn’t come with the inital promise of Tesla owners being able to go to sleep in their vehicles and wake up at their destination – a promise that Musk has used to sell Tesla vehicles for years.
Electrek’s Take
The way Tesla discusses autonomy with customers and investors versus how it presents it in its court filings and legally binding documents is strikingly different.
It should be worrying to anyone with an interest in this.
With this very vague description in the new CEO compensation package, Tesla could literally lower the price of FSD and even remove base Autopilot to push customers toward FSD and give Musk hundreds of billions of dollars in shares in the process.
There’s precedent for Tesla decreasing pricing on FSD. Initially, Musk said that Tesla would gradually increase the price of the FSD package as the features improved and approached unsupervised autonomy.
That was true for a while, but then Tesla started slashing FSD prices, which are now down $7,000 from their high in 2023:
The trend is quite apparent and coincidentally began when Tesla’s sales started to decline.
FSD is now a simple ADAS system without any promise of unsupervised self-driving. This might quite honestly be one of the biggest cases of false advertising or bait-and-switch ever.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
The new Chevy Bolt EV is set to enter production later this year, with one fewer shift, following GM’s reduction in production plans at several US plants. Apart from the Bolt, GM promised a new family of affordable EVs. Are those, too, now at risk?
GM says more affordable EVs are coming, but when?
GM remained the number two EV maker in the US after back-to-back record sales months in July and August. However, with the $7,500 federal tax credit set to expire at the end of the month, the company expects a slowdown.
On Thursday, GM sent a note to employees at its Spring Hill plant in Tennessee, outlining plans to reduce output of two Cadillac electric SUVs, the Lyriq and Vistiq.
A source close to the matter confirmed the news to Reuters, saying the production halt will begin in December. GM will significantly reduce output during the first five months of 2026, according to the source.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
GM is also delaying the second shift at its Fairfax Assembly Plant in Kansas City, where the new Chevy Bolt is slated to enter production later this year. The Bolt will be the first of a new series of affordable EVs that GM intends to build in Kansas.
GM plans to build a “next-gen affordable EV) in Kansas (Source: GM)
However, those too, may now be in jeopardy. According to local news outlets, GM Korea Technical Research Center (GMTCK), a spin-off of GM’s Korean subsidiary, was recently cut out of a secret small EV project it was developing.
GMTCK president Brian McMurray reportedly announced internally last month during a trip to the US that the project was cancelled and only 30% to 40% complete.
A GM Korea spokesperson clarified that “the EV project being led by GMTCK was a global undertaking, not undertaken solely by GM Korea. The spokesperson added, “The project itself has not been canceled; the role of the Korean team has simply changed.”
The new electric car, dubbed “Fun Family,” was scheduled to launch under the Chevy and Buick brands, using a single platform. Production was expected to begin in 2027 with deliveries starting in 2028.
2022 Chevy Bolt EUV (Source: GM)
GM Korea exports over 90% of the vehicles it makes to the US, but with the new auto tariffs, the subsidiary is expected to play a drastically smaller role, if any at all. The news is fueling the ongoing rumors that GM could withdraw from Korea altogether.
In addition to the tariffs, South Korea’s recently passed “Yellow Envelope Law” could make it even more difficult for GM with new labor laws.
Chevy Equinox EV LT (Source: GM)
Will this impact the affordable EVs GM is promising to launch in the US? They are scheduled to be built in Kansas, but with the R&D Center, GM’s second largest globally, following the US, claiming to be excluded from a major global EV project, it can’t be a good sign.
In the meantime, GM already has one of the most affordable electric vehicles in the US, the Chevy Equinox EV. Starting at under $35,000, the company calls it “America’s most affordable” EV with over 315 miles of range.
With the $7,500 federal tax credit still available, GM is promoting Chevy Equinox EV leases for under $250 a month. Nowadays, it’s hard to find any vehicle for under that.
Connecticut and Rhode Island are suing the Trump administration to overturn its “baseless” decision to halt Revolution Wind, a nearly completed offshore wind farm set to deliver clean power to New England.
Attorneys General William Tong of Connecticut and Peter Neronha of Rhode Island announced Thursday that they’ll file suit in Rhode Island federal court to overturn the August 22 stop-work order from the Bureau of Ocean and Energy Management (BOEM). The order abruptly shut down construction without citing any violation of law or safety threats. Instead, BOEM vaguely referred to “concerns” under its Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act authority, offering no explanation.
Revolution Wind is 15 nautical miles off Rhode Island and expected to come online in 2026. Once complete, the $6 billion project would supply 350,000 homes with electricity and save ratepayers in Connecticut and Rhode Island hundreds of millions of dollars over 20 years. The project supports more than 2,500 jobs across the US, including over 1,000 union construction jobs, and has already cleared every required state and federal review. Construction is already 80% complete.
The lawsuit, to be filed against the Department of the Interior, BOEM, and their nominated leaders, argues that the stop-work order violates the Administrative Procedure Act and the agency’s authority under OCSLA. The complaint says the government’s action is arbitrary, capricious, and undermines both states’ legal and financial commitments.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
“Revolution Wind is fully permitted, nearly complete, and months from providing enough American-made, clean, affordable energy to power 350,000 homes. Now, with zero justification, Trump wants to mothball the project, send workers home, and saddle Connecticut families with millions of dollars in higher energy costs,” Tong said. “This kind of erratic and reckless governing is blatantly illegal, and we’re suing to stop it.”
Neronha added, “With Revolution Wind, we have an opportunity to create good-paying jobs for Rhode Islanders, enhance energy reliability, and ensure energy cost savings while protecting our environment. And yet, this stop-work order is not even the latest development in this administration’s all-out assault on wind energy. Just yesterday, we learned of reports that the Administration is pulling in staff from several different unrelated federal agencies, including Health and Human Services, to do its bidding. This is bizarre, this is unlawful, this is potentially devastating, and we won’t stand by and watch it happen.”
Connecticut Governor Ned Lamont said the administration has offered no explanation nearly two weeks after the order. “We hoped to work with the Administration to lower energy costs, strengthen grid reliability, create jobs, and drive economic growth, but only if they share those goals. But if they do not, we will act to preserve this vital project and protect the energy future of Connecticut and the entire New England region,” he said.
Senator Richard Blumenthal (D-CT) called the shutdown “insane, illogical, and illegal,” while Senator Chris Murphy (D-CT) said, “The Revolution Wind project has already made it through exhaustive reviews by multiple federal agencies, and I doubt Trump’s flimsy excuses for scuttling this project will stand up to legal scrutiny.”
Danish renewables developer Ørsted, which owns a 50% share in Revolution Wind, also announced Thursday that it’s suing the Trump administration in a bid to restart construction on the blocked wind farm.
The 30% federal solar tax credit is ending this year. If you’ve ever considered going solar, now’s the time to act. To make sure you find a trusted, reliable solar installer near you that offers competitive pricing, check out EnergySage, a free service that makes it easy for you to go solar. It has hundreds of pre-vetted solar installers competing for your business, ensuring you get high-quality solutions and save 20-30% compared to going it alone. Plus, it’s free to use, and you won’t get sales calls until you select an installer and share your phone number with them.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. Get started here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.