Comments on: How Credible Are Blogs? http://news.accuracast.com/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/ News from the world of Internet & mobile search and social media Tue, 07 Feb 2012 13:14:19 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: LinkedIn Users Richer, More Influential | AccuraCast Search Daily News http://news.accuracast.com/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-10704 LinkedIn Users Richer, More Influential | AccuraCast Search Daily News Tue, 11 Nov 2008 17:43:27 +0000 http://www.accuracast.com/search-daily-news/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/#comment-10704 [...] Validity of these statistics does rely on user integrity, which is often questionable on most social sites, as has been noted before - a lot of men and women lie about age, salary, status and physical appearance. It is nevertheless more likely that users of LinkedIn are better off, more influential and constantly receiving requests for new introductions. The network thus ends up being a great site for sales persons looking to boost their income and advertisers looking to target top-level executives. [...] [...] Validity of these statistics does rely on user integrity, which is often questionable on most social sites, as has been noted before – a lot of men and women lie about age, salary, status and physical appearance. It is nevertheless more likely that users of LinkedIn are better off, more influential and constantly receiving requests for new introductions. The network thus ends up being a great site for sales persons looking to boost their income and advertisers looking to target top-level executives. [...]

]]> By: AccuraCast http://news.accuracast.com/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-10648 AccuraCast Tue, 04 Nov 2008 10:06:17 +0000 http://www.accuracast.com/search-daily-news/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/#comment-10648 @Graham: Very true. The final point in the post says just that - poor journalism is at fault - but you have spelt it out much better. @Graham: Very true. The final point in the post says just that – poor journalism is at fault – but you have spelt it out much better.

]]> By: Graham Jones - Internet Psychologist http://news.accuracast.com/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/comment-page-1/#comment-10647 Graham Jones - Internet Psychologist Tue, 04 Nov 2008 00:36:34 +0000 http://www.accuracast.com/search-daily-news/blogs-7471/how-credible-are-blogs/#comment-10647 The problem you highlight is nothing to do with blogs. People have started rumours, said the wrong things, or even blatantly lied well before the invention of blogging. They told friends in bars their stories, or circulated rumours via Memos at work. Rumours, lies and deceit have been part of human history since the invention of language. The problem is poor journalism. In the past, the media checked the information they were given for its truthfulness. Nowadays, sloppy journalism means that anything that is written is assumed to have been previously checked and is therefore OK to use. Not true. Blogs are nothing more than conversations and should be treated as such by journalists. Blogs are not a replacement for journalistic research - yet they often appear to be used in this way by reporters in a hurry. The problem you highlight is nothing to do with blogs. People have started rumours, said the wrong things, or even blatantly lied well before the invention of blogging. They told friends in bars their stories, or circulated rumours via Memos at work. Rumours, lies and deceit have been part of human history since the invention of language.

The problem is poor journalism. In the past, the media checked the information they were given for its truthfulness. Nowadays, sloppy journalism means that anything that is written is assumed to have been previously checked and is therefore OK to use. Not true.

Blogs are nothing more than conversations and should be treated as such by journalists. Blogs are not a replacement for journalistic research – yet they often appear to be used in this way by reporters in a hurry.

]]>