Blog Topic 3: Credibility!

The World Wide Web is an incredible tool that has helped and hindered since the 20^th century. Anyone can write on the internet and have an opinion; however, many have no credibility and sometimes it’s hard to tell whether someone has any factual information with the ability to back it up (Wilcox et al. 2013). With the traditionalists saying we shouldn’t rely heavily on search engines for facts, in my opinion this is absolutely correct. Search engines like Google and Bing allow anyone to obtain information on any topic; however, in many cases you are directed to sites similar to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is well known in the educational sector as a site that has no credibility as anyone can post anything on any topic. In saying this it can give public relations practitioners an idea on a topic; however, it should never be used to base a campaign on as this is secondary information (Lawson 2014). Primary information is the most relevant when it comes to basing a campaign, searching for an organisations website and obtaining information there is a practice used by many public relations practitioners (Wilcox et al. 2013). It must be noted that there are still many sources on the internet that are credible, it’s just a matter of having the ability to be subjective when reading the information. Being subjective when reading a source; whether it be on Wikipedia or other websites, means to look at the content for biasness and other emotive indicators that could well mean the source is written for the purpose to persuade an audience. Usually indicating the source may not be credible. 

Lawson, C 2014, Module 3 The public relations campaign: planning, COMM11110 Introduction to Public Relations study guide, CQUniversity, viewed 6 May 2014, http://moodle.cqu.edu.au/course/view.php?name=COMM11110_2141

Wilcox, D, Cameron, G, Reber, B & Shin, J 2013, Think Public Relations, Pearson, New Jersey.