Political attack ads ≠ product attack ads?

The 2013 Harris Interactive RQ (Reputation Quotient) poll is out, and Amazon is on top.  What struck me, was that Microsoft had fallen quite a bit, so I thought I'd cull some of their older sets of polls to see what was going on.  This is what I got:

80 is the cut off level for Harris Interactive's rating for "Excellent".  In the nine years of data I could find (2009 and 2010 are exactly the same, so it points to some sort of duplication error) Microsoft managed to break the 80 point level twice, while Google is the opposite.

So it occurred to me, that of recent vintage Microsoft has been trying to shore up its products by using political-style attack ads against Microsoft, with its Scroogled (2012, 2013) and its Gmail Man (2011).  While it may have damaged some of Google's reputation, it may have resulted in a disproportionate knock on Microsoft's name.

Microsoft is now ranked lower than Apple was, just before Apple introduced the iPhone.

Likewise, I wonder if all those lawsuits have been hurting the reputation of Apple more than it has, of Google?