Archive of UserLand's first discussion group, started October 5, 1998.

How do you trust the messenger?

Author:Angus Fraser
Posted:7/14/2000; 9:03:25 PM
Topic:How do you trust the messenger?
Msg #:18641
Prev/Next:18640 / 18642

Charles Cooper asks in his article "If everyone's got the right to be a publisher, how do you know whether or not you can trust the messenger?". I think one thing he's missed is that the internet actually gives us tools to build trust like no other message medium.

History shows payment is no guarantee of accurate or quality messages. The traditional "big league" editorial process often fails to deliver what it promises. On the other hand without editorial checks the messages we receive from non professional writers might be inaccurate, self important or biased, though in the case of Charles Cooper's article we got this even with editorial checks.

The internet is not just a "narcissist's dream" it is also a dream come true for people who want to trust their messengers.

It gives me so many ways to verify the truth in the messages I receive. I can quickly and easily read many different commentaries. In the case of Ballmer's speech as argued over by Cooper & Winer I can even go to microsoft's .NET site and listen to it for myself.

An independent writer online is not the same as someone briefly heard on a soapbox in the park. Trust can be built through a relationship with their writing as a whole (and dialog via email or message boards). In the case of Dave Winer I have over six years of his almost daily writing archived online to enable me to decide whether I want to trust his messages on any particular issue. By the time of his .NET coverage I had decided that i trusted and appreciated his unique viewpoint on this stuff and tuned in to hear his very personal coverage live from the event.

Also, if I have my own message, my own unique spin on the facts, the internet enables me to get it to others. Why should I be branded a narcissist just because I don't get payment from a large media organisation, or have someone else who is paid by a large media organisation vet my writing. Surely others who now have access to it can read my own message and make up their own mind on its worth.

Finally Cooper doesn't come across as an "ink-stained fuddy duddy" but as much worse, he seems light weight, unimaginative and hypocritical. He hasn't given an extremely interesting topic the thought that it deserves. The mass of data and writing on the internet from all sources has become one of the best "user experiences" of media I have ever had, my fascination and amazement strengthens daily.

There are responses to this message:

This page was archived on 6/13/2001; 4:55:41 PM.

© Copyright 1998-2001 UserLand Software, Inc.