Today I find that Steve Rubel seems to think that all the world’s a popularity contest and B.L. Ochman kills the messenger.
Now this is important for a few reasons. Both of these bloggers are considered to be ‘influential bloggers’. Rubel is cited by Edelman and Intelliseek as one of the top three, along with Jeremy Pepper and Elizabeth Albrycht. Ochman is quoted in the paper.
Every time I give a talk on blogging the question comes up – how do you assess the credibility of a blogger and what he/she is writing. Robin Good has broken out the key indicators one can use to determine whether an online independent writer, news reporter or blogger has reach, authority and credibility in the work he/she does. These include…
* Assessing his/herTechnorati standing
* Checking whether the person makes his/her traffic statistics publicly viewable
* Using Google and Marketleap
* Researching the blogger’s media coverage
Steve Rubel, come on.
Robin Good writes “How To Measure A Blogger’s Popularity And Reach: The Big Jump” … it is Rubel that writes “How to Measure a Blogger’s Credibility”.
Good’s analogy has ‘credibility’ … Rubel’s is just silly.
The Edelman & Intelliseek paper tells us that Rubel is considered an influential source – and not just because of the links. Credibility comes from people analyzing what you have written over time (and the way those people react to what you have written) to determine your credibility. Isn’t that the way it works?
If you have tons of links, but they are making fun of you – is that credibility?
For example, when Edelman and Intelliseek quote Rubel’s observation,
“For the first time in the information age, there’s a human face on business. Blogging allows you to have a two-way dialogue in a public forum, led by real people. For the first time, public relations means relating with the public.”
isn’t that a sign of Rubel’s perceived credibility? They trust Rubel’s observation. The combination of Edelman and Intelliseek citing Rubel in that manner and my (the reader) perceiving Edelman and Intelliseek as reliable sources determine the credibility I assign to Rubel.
Just linking to your blog could have occured at Don Crowther’s PR 101 aggregator site. Is that a link that says credibility? No, it says you are one of the many he’s taking from to try and drive traffic to his site.
In the Edelman & Intelliseek paper, they single out Rubel, Pepper and Albrycht in the section about “Who are the most influential bloggers?” The paper also states “…credibility also takes into consideration what the blogger stand (sic) for, and bloggers are often much more willing to take a personal stand or express an opinion, while traditional reporters continue to embrace their objectivity.” Steve Rubel says it is (quoting here) Technorati links, traffic, Google/Marketleap and clippings. Please tell me there is more to credibility.
So, is PR blogging a Facebook experience to Steve Rubel? Over there at Facebook it is all about how many ‘friends’ you have. Links and Google juice aid in determining reach, perhaps. But authority and credibility?
Likewise, being cited by others could mean being considered an authority, but doesn’t assure that someone ‘is’ an authority. I pray that assigning credibility is a much more involved process.
Come on. You don’t really believe that links and clips say it all, do you Steve?
Steve, even influencers can lack credibility. Popularity means little, if anything, toward proving credibility.
On another front, B. L. Ochman writes:
(the) Events Staffing Director of something called Poshability just sent me a 1 MB press release as an email attachment. I looked up the website and it has an under construction notice on it.
Please, someone fire this woman.
She gets an earful from Jeremy Pepper and Darren Barefoot.
Their comments say it all.
I will say that I worry about one thing. B. L., I pray your dog never wets the carpet.