Criticisms of Tinder, Hinge, Match.com, Plenty of Fish, and OkCupid (2019–2024)
Are modern dating apps designed to prioritize for profits over lasting relationships
Tinder: Swipe Culture and Its Consequences
Tinder pioneered swipe-based dating, designed to be addictive through intermittent rewards. Psychologists describe it as a slot machine for romance, rewarding users with dopamine spikes for matches and reinforcing compulsive usage [1]. Many users report feeling addicted, citing lowered self-esteem, body shame, and dating fatigue. The validation cycle of matching and rejection can be emotionally exhausting.
Tinder also faces consistent complaints regarding harassment, with a significant number of women experiencing sexual violence from matches. Investigative reports have revealed that known offenders can create new profiles with ease. A particularly troubling case involved a man who was reported for assaults across Tinder and Hinge but was not banned across Match Group’s platforms for years [2].
Privacy has also been a significant issue. Tinder collects vast amounts of user data, and in one case, a journalist received an 800-page dossier detailing every swipe, message, and location. Moreover, a massive cache of Tinder profile photos was scraped and leaked online, raising fears about misuse and surveillance [3].
Tinder's algorithm, originally modeled on Elo ratings (like chess rankings), has been criticized for opacity and reinforcing biases. Racial minorities and transgender users have reported discrimination or being hidden. The platform prioritizes profiles based on popularity, further skewing visibility. Tinder also heavily promotes paid upgrades (e.g., Super Likes, Boosts, Tinder Gold), leading to widespread frustration among men who feel the app is rigged to encourage payment [4].
Hinge: "Designed to Be Deleted"?
Hinge brands itself as a relationship-oriented app, offering prompts to encourage deeper connections. It limits likes and presents a curated feed, aiming to reduce swipe fatigue. Users often view it as more substantive than Tinder, though many report mixed experiences and dating fatigue.
Hinge has faced backlash for its monetization strategy, especially the "Standouts and Roses" feature, which promotes attractive profiles behind a paywall. This system has been criticized for creating a two-tiered experience and pushing users toward paid upgrades [5].
A major safety issue occurred when the same offender who used Tinder to assault women also used Hinge to find victims. Despite multiple reports, Match Group failed to block the individual across its apps, revealing flaws in cross-platform safety measures [2].
Users also complain that Hinge’s algorithm promotes profiles that are most likely to drive engagement rather than genuine compatibility. AI-driven features, such as suggested replies or match predictions, have drawn concern over transparency and data usage [5].
Match.com: Trust Eroded by Deceptive Practices
Match.com, one of the oldest platforms, has shifted toward a freemium model but maintains a reputation for long-form profiles and older demographics. In 2019, the FTC sued Match Group for sending misleading emails to free users, suggesting someone had messaged them—when in fact, the messages often came from fake or scam accounts [6].
Other complaints include difficulties with subscription cancellation, poor customer support, and a high number of inactive or ghost profiles. The matching algorithm is also criticized for being outdated and delivering irrelevant suggestions. Despite its legacy, Match.com has struggled to modernize while maintaining user trust.
Plenty of Fish: A Free Platform with High Risks
Plenty of Fish (POF) is known for its open-access model, which attracts a large user base but also creates significant moderation challenges. Users frequently report scams, bots, spam messages, and harassment. The lack of verification or paywalls enables repeat offenders to rejoin with ease.
In 2019, a researcher discovered that POF’s API exposed private user information—such as hidden names and ZIP codes—to unauthorized viewers. This raised concerns about user safety and data protection [7].
POF has made efforts to integrate safety features, like photo moderation and AI to detect explicit content. However, many users continue to describe it as unsafe or chaotic, especially compared to more curated platforms.
OkCupid: From Idealism to Commercialization
OkCupid built its brand on compatibility algorithms using detailed questionnaires. It allowed users to match based on shared values, politics, or preferences. However, many of these features have been diminished or put behind paywalls over time.
Privacy concerns emerged in 2020 when a report revealed that OkCupid was sharing detailed user data with third-party advertisers, including information about sexual preferences and political views [8]. Additionally, user images were used by an AI company for facial recognition training without consent.
OkCupid also transitioned to a swipe-based model, replacing browsing by preference with algorithmic suggestions. Users complained that match percentages became inflated or unreliable, and that monetization—such as SuperLikes and A-List subscriptions—began to outweigh user experience.
The company has made efforts to present as progressive and inclusive, with expanded gender and orientation options and social cause badges. However, critics argue that its data practices and algorithm changes have eroded the platform’s integrity.
Common Themes Across Platforms
Across all five platforms, several consistent issues emerge:
Mental Health Strain: The gamification of dating has been linked to anxiety, self-esteem issues, and dating fatigue.
Safety Failures: Serial abusers have exploited gaps in moderation. Match Group has been slow to ban offenders across platforms.
Data Exploitation: From scraped photos to AI training and advertising partnerships, apps are criticized for invasive data practices.
Algorithmic Bias: Racial minorities, transgender users, and less conventionally attractive profiles are often disadvantaged.
Monetization Conflicts: Paywalls, boosts, and visibility tiers create a profit model that thrives on keeping users engaged—not helping them find lasting connections.
References
Dazed: "Dating apps are ‘slot machines for self-esteem’, say experts" – February 15, 2024
https://www.dazeddigital.com/life-culture/article/62045/1/dating-apps-addiction-mental-health-psychology-tinder-psychologistsThe Guardian: "Match Group knew dangerous users were moving between apps – internal memo" – January 28, 2025
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2025/jan/28/match-group-internal-documents-dangerous-usersNOVA: "How much Tinder knows about you—swipe data, Spotify and Instagram integrations" – March 22, 2021
https://www.novauk.org/news/tinder-data-gdpr-profile-scrapeMozilla Foundation: "Algorithmic Bias in Dating Apps" – June 10, 2023
https://foundation.mozilla.org/en/privacy-not-included/dating-apps-algorithmic-bias/Vox: "Why Hinge is the ‘best of the worst’ dating apps" – November 5, 2023
https://www.vox.com/2023/11/05/hinge-best-of-the-worst-dating-appFTC v. Match Group: "FTC Complaint Against Match.com" – September 12, 2019
https://www.ftc.gov/legal-library/browse/cases-proceedings/1923043-match-group-complaintTechCrunch: "Plenty of Fish leaks hidden names and zip codes" – December 4, 2019
https://techcrunch.com/2019/12/04/plenty-of-fish-api-leak-names-zip-codes/Norwegian Consumer Council: "Out of Control: Dating apps, data and deception" – January 2020
https://www.norwegianconsumer.org/reports/dating-apps-data-deception