A Matter of Trust

Picked up a book again after many weeks of being utterly enamoured with my new iPhone 4. The book this time is called Trust Agents: Using the Web to Build Influence, Improve Reputation, and Earn Trust by Chris Brogan and Julien Smith.

Have read up to page 20 so far and I like what I'm reading.

Interesting reading on a subject that we somehow already have an inkling of what it's about and completely rely on. Trust is so important in every thing that we do. But can trust lead you in a direction that you may not want to be on?

I usually refer to reviews prior to buying a business book. And my sources tend to be 2: 1) reviews that appear on the book itself or found in news publications (like WSJ, for e.g.) and 2) the readers themselves (like those on Amazon or Virtual Bookshelf on Living Social).  My decision on whether or not to purchase the book depends heavily on these reviews more so than on whether I like the book sypnosis or the first couple of pages. The number of glowing reviews must be far more than the scathing ones. In other words, I "trust" the reviews.

But a number of times, my "trust" seems misplaced.  I'd read several glowing reviews and be persuaded to buy the book, only to discover upon reading several chapters that the book is utter crap.

Case in point, Waiting for Your Cat to Bark?: Persuading Customers When They Ignore Marketing. An utterly boring read with not much insight or new information and the funny part was it's supposed to have been written by people who are experts in copywriting (i.e. experts in making engaging copy). Go figure.

The point is, how can so many people be wrong?  In my point of view that is, and that being how could these people find pleasure or knowledge in this book when I do not find them myself?

I felt....cheated. I had trusted these reviewers and shelled out money for a book which I later found to have no value for.

One might argue that I did not do my due diligence. That perhaps the sources of "trust" that I had were too narrow in scope and that I should've researched more.

Okay....can someone give me more time in the day to do that?

Advertising was supposed to be the purveyor of trust.  Back before, all one had to do was look, listen or read those ads, "trust" the message and make the purchase.  But soon, advertising were viewed with skepticism and other channels of "trust" were required.  WOM, Social Media, reviews....all this were other sources of "trust" that we could depend on to make our decisions.

But just how much "trust" do we need to find before making that purchase?  The one thing right now that I think advertising had going for it was the time factor. Back in its heyday, advertising did the job of convincing in very little time.

But because it became so untrustworthy, one had to look around for other ways to be convinced. And that's the thing...."had to look around" or search. And search takes time.

Time which not many of us have. If we had to spend so much time searching for trustworthy sources that can influence buying decisions....well, we might be better-informed....I would not have bought that book...but do I have all the time in the world?  If everyone did that, nothing would get done.

So who do we trust? Where do we find them? But more importantly, do we have the time for the search?

In a way, I do miss how advertising works. Before, it took the guesswork out of the decision-making. I'm convinced and I buy....I didn't really have to spend so much time justifying why I believe the message is trustworthy.

And that's the downfall of advertising. If only it was more trustworthy, then books like the ones I mentioned above, would not have been necessary.