Established brands bring trust and authority to online content

13 March 2008

Did you hear the one about the journalists who relied on Wikipedia for their sources? In their obituary for Ronnie Hazlehurst, who died last October, a number of journalists mentioned his many TV theme tunes for shows like Last of the Summer Wine and, of course, his famous hit 'Reach' written at the age of 72 for pop group S Club 7.

Unfortunately Hazlehurst didn't write 'Reach', but journalists from respected organisations like the BBC, Reuters, The Times and The Guardian reported it because Wikipedia said it was true.

I'm not criticising Wikipedia; it has an excellent system of community editing that weeds out this type of wiki-hoax, eventually. But this episode illustrates the dangers of relying on information that doesn't have the force of authority behind it.

Some would argue that Wikipedia and similar communities of content are more reliable than other information sources because they represent the wisdom of the crowd, they have no axe to grind so are neutral and thus reliable. The information in these communities is written by self-appointed experts who are primarily amateurs. This makes them incredibly vibrant and creates a place where people congregate because their opinion is valued. They can express themselves and reinforce personal value and meaning, not have information thrust upon them from outside.

Brands have been rushing to have their content involved in these spaces because they're realising that this is where people are and that you have to stop shouting at them from a distance if you want to enter a dialogue. But there's a downside. As the number of these communities increases, the people you're trying to communicate with slip further from your reach. As the wealth of information proliferates, how do you distinguish between strongly researched and reliable information and a wiki-hoax?

Within the morass of information online there's something we take for granted: authority. We go to newspaper websites because we appreciate the authority of their journalists; we watch video clips of our favourite shows on YouTube because we know we'll enjoy them. We have an innate expectation of brand quality that sits alongside our desires for great content. We do this without even thinking about it because we already have a trust relationship with brands.

It's the revolution in reverse. Authority brings value, it's no longer there to be torn down. The guardians of established brands are in a remarkable place. They have an inherent authority in the online world that will only increase as content and delivery methods grow, whether they're making the most of it right now or not. And crucially that authority gives them permission in a crowded market to create content not just related to product but also to brand persona.

In a cluttered online market new brands have to work far harder than established brands to launch content into the digital space. Established brands can profit from their existing authority to extend their brand associations and to experiment with communications in the places their audiences are spending their time. They have a head start on community content creators and should use this, as the audience will increasingly look to the brands they know to help them navigate the cluttered and confusing digital content experience.

Katie Streton is content strategist for digital communications at Imagination