Blogger's Trust

Looks like this and other blogs are for the enjoyment or the entertainment of the author and the respective readers more than anything else. Because according to this study by GlobeScan, done for the BBC-Reuters-Media Center “We Media” Forum, people don't trust the information gathered on blogs. That hurts. Or does it? I guess, as a blog reader, for me it depends whether I actually know the blogger, often personally, because his/her name are visible. However, anonymous bloggers rank rather low on my trust level. Particularly, when discussing controversial subjects, talking to a phantom does regularly make my BS alarm go off. That would make those blogger be categorized as quadrant 1. Seems like quadrants can be used in all sorts of ways, and this one from Paul English appears to magically work as well.

Back to that study. Could it be that the BBC-Reuters folks feel the impact of blogs in their subscription or viewer numbers? In other words, are they trying to tell the public that some news anchor on a screen is more trustworthy than blogs? I mean, I'd consider the BBC a typically trustworthy network, but some topics are simply not discussed there and the internet (including blogs) are certainly putting pressure on the TV and radio networks, as discussed in this article about an 2001 UCLA study. On the far end of the scala, there are state-controlled TV and radio. In those countries, I'd probably trust a blog more than the official news.

And then there is advertising. Do I trust those TV ads that show a guy wipe a filthy oven or kitchen sink spotless with one single swoosh? Answer not necessary. On the other hand, would I trust a number of (even anonymous) blog-like comments and consistent reviews about cameras, electronics, or other stuff, posted on a shopping site such as Pricegrabber, Ciao or Amazon? More likely.