Comments on: PR/Social Marketing Trends, or the lack of them

By: Dan Greenfield

Dan Greenfield — Wed, 07 Feb 2007 18:02:10 +0000

Thanks for the call out. Though not a “radical” PR professional, I agree with you on the role of technology in reaching new audiences. What is particularly challenging is building the crediblity you mentioned. The New York Times has over a hundred years of history behind. Bloggers have a few months to a few years in most instances. They not only have to build a case for any argument they are making, they have to build a following to carry the message.

But that doesn’t mean the Times is hands down winner. It may actually be a disadvantage as multiple sources compete for the reader’s attention.

And in the sign of the times,what does credibility mean any way? If you want to believe a point of view, facts don’t need to stand in the way.

By: Rusty

Rusty — Thu, 01 Feb 2007 15:13:47 +0000

After all, without credibility an MSM organization does not have much of a future. And that runs at the heart of the value of both New Media and MSM. They both need credibility if they’re going to survive as mediums.

I think newer forms of media have an easier slope to climb, as people’s expectations aren’t nearly as high. When the New York Times advertises itself as The Most Credible Source of Information in the History of the World Ever, every little mistake it makes will be scrutinized. And without a self-policing mechanism (like comments on a blog), people are going to trust them even less. Whereas, if something inaccurate shows up on a blog or in a YouTube video, people can leave a comment and call said writer on their BS.