First Draft by Tim Porter

Transparency & Trust

J.D. Lasica makes the case in an article for the Online Journalism Review that people are placing an increasing amount of trust in blogs as a source of news and credible information.

J.D. points to a new"attention index" compiled by Dave Sifry, founder of the blog-tracking siteTechnorati, that shows a number of blogs out-linking many mainstream news sites. "The more people who link to you, the greater your authority," says Lasica.

The list is led by the New York Times, CNN, BBC News and the Washington Post. Then, as Lasica says, "things start to get interesting." Blogs such as Slashdot, Plastic, Instapundit and Boing Boing are among the top 20, meaning as many bloggers or more are linking to them as to the sites of the San Francisco Chronicle, CNET and Salon magazine.

Much of the trust readers place in these blogs lies in their transparency, which technologist Mary Hodder defines this way:

 Transparency in motives. Bloggers are upfront about their biases and subjective approach, and they have greater freedom to speak from the heart and use a personal voice. Most journalists are constrained by an institutional objectivity. "I often read a reporter's story and wonder, what's their experience? Where are they coming from? What's the context? What do they really think?" Hodder says.

 Transparency in process. Bloggers link to documents, sources and supporting evidence to buttress their own authority. "The top-down press articles I see are written as if they're not connected to anything, as if they just came out of a vacuum," she says.

Jeff Jarvis argues in the article that "bloggers are more trusted, I think, because they are human and too often news organizations are not. ... News organizations are big and often monolithic and are reluctant to admit let alone share perspective or agendas."

I don't agree with Jarvis' argument that mainstream journalists should reveal their personal biases so the public can have a context in which to interpret their professional work. The journalism should speak for itself. But, he and Hodder are correct in pushing for more transparency.

Newspaper reporters, for example, regularly have far more information in their notebooks than ends up in their printed stories. Why not add that information to the online version of the story -- the full interview, links to source documents, phone numbers and email addresses of the public officials interviewed?

Some newspapers have made efforts to remove the mystery from their editorial processes. The San Francisco Chronicle, for example, put lengthy videos of its editorial board interviews with mayoral candidates Gavin Newsom and Matt Gonzalez online in order to, as editorial page editor John Diaz wrote at the time, "give readers a window into our endorsement process, as well as to give voters a chance to view the candidates answering questions at greater length than they typically see at debates."

Newspapers are trying hard to regain public credibility and efforts like reader networks and community conversations are laudable but they don't go far enough.

The most important lesson mainstream journalists can learn from bloggers is that to gain trust from their readers they must put trust in their readers. Open up the journalistic process. Share the sources. Give the public more space in the paper (or, as the Bakersfield Californiann is doing with the Northwest Voice, let them write part of the paper themselves.)

Journalists saying, "Trust me, I'm a pro," doesn't work any longer. Saying, "I'm a pro so I'm going to trust you," just might.

Posted by Tim Porter at August 12, 2004 11:05 AM