People, Media, Companies – Who you trust and how it happens
Posted in Alternative Energy | Architecture | Communication | Marketing | Social Media by Marty Muggleton (VP Client Development & Marketing) on January 26, 2012

I’ve been working long enough that young people think I’m wise. Secretly, I think they mean old and just want to be nice about it. But these are gifted people, with a bright future and we have some interesting discussions. Broad but predictable range of topics – religion, environment, healthcare, politics, and the list goes on.

Over the holidays, I had a couple of interesting discussions on news, truth, and trust. These chats matched up with some free time that let me look at the relationship of news, truth, and trust a bit differently.

The primary role of media is news not truth. They mark the date of an event, and that establishes chronology. You hear on television and radio. “At 11:00 this morning…”. A book or published research attempts to offer truth, by reaching for cause and effect after the event happened. You read it. “We found measurable amounts of…”. Trust, I feel, is established by where you are and what you’re surrounded by.

People are quick to take a position on important or controversial topics. Then they monitor and choose information sources that support their position. We all do it. But, do we understand which sources we trust? Here is what I am learning. People trust people (online communities and social media) more than they trust media enterprises (ProPublica, NPR, cable news). They trust media enterprises more than they trust corporate media (ABC, New York Times). They trust corporate media more that they trust companies (profit makers). This happens despite that fact that the burden of legal and ethically responsible reporting trends the other way, at least in my opinion. Companies have a corporate, moral, and legal responsibility to report events, activities, and the truth. Corporate media is almost the same, but they report just the event and have the buffer of being able to offer retractions and corrections if they choose. Media enterprises seem to have less at risk. I sense they act the same as the corporate media, but they don’t seem to maintain balance, and I can’t remember many retractions or corrections. People, like you and me, are largely guided by a moral obligation to tell the truth. If we’ve made our minds up, it’s tough to be open to the truth when it differs from the opinions that we have formed. If we are consumed by always being right about a topic, our truth can be compromised.

My position on topics is formed by my beliefs. I form those beliefs from experience, listening to media, reading research, and listening to people. More importantly, I’m open to truth and try to surround myself with people and sources that are as well. I test the difference between truth and opinion no matter the source. So when I hear something is bad, I consider it an opinion. What I need to know is why is it bad, what viable alternative is better, and is the source open to the truth?

We should look at every important topic in our lives this way.

Related links:
The Value of a Billionaire
Conversations in the Region: Boots on the ground
Conversations from the Region: Check the slope of the curve

Comments (3) | Permalink | Tags: Marcellus Shale, Media, PR, Public Relations, TARM, TerrAqua Resource Management