The embedded article bears careful reading, both for what it includes and what it omits.. At first glance, the article sorts 100 top brands into a top 50 and bottom 50, with the assertion that the bottom 50 are less trustworthy. That may be true, but they fail to point out that many other companies did not make the top 100 at all. For example, Fox comes in at 98 on the list because they are perceived as “offering a distorted version of the news.” However, CNN, MSNBC, CBS, etc did not make the list at all. Maybe I am not alone in thinking that most all of the televised news media are hopelessly biased!
A second question with the analysis involves not knowing what other brands might be embedded in the ones listed. For example, does PepsiCo still own Burger King? And does this matter given the way they surveyed people to develop the initial 100?
Thirdly, it would be nice to see the questions used to survey people’s view of brand reputations. Interesting to consider, and maybe even an entertaining diversion…
Your comment about fox news is interesting. I think their brand gets noticed because all you heat about is Fox News, Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. They are everywhere. I never see or hear anything about Rachel Maddox. Not saying she is not opinionated, she is just not far out there as the others.
That’s odd; I don’t hear about Fox any more than CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and one or two others, but I tend to look at the media outlets rather than the commentators. That triggers a thought, though: remember when the newscasts had an anchorman (think Walter Cronkite) and a gaggle of reporters? Now all we have is commentators of various stripes. Some of them claim to be reporters, but they act like commentators and present a repeated narrative rather than complete (factual) news stories. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, it just might be a duck. And so it is with so many “reporters” who sound, look, and act like commentators. Hard to find good reporting, which is sad. The phrase, “yellow dog journalism” was coined a long time ago, so maybe it has always been this way in one form or another.
A Cup of Brouhaha 
Your comment about fox news is interesting. I think their brand gets noticed because all you heat about is Fox News, Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity. They are everywhere. I never see or hear anything about Rachel Maddox. Not saying she is not opinionated, she is just not far out there as the others.
LikeLike
That’s odd; I don’t hear about Fox any more than CNN, MSNBC, CBS, and one or two others, but I tend to look at the media outlets rather than the commentators. That triggers a thought, though: remember when the newscasts had an anchorman (think Walter Cronkite) and a gaggle of reporters? Now all we have is commentators of various stripes. Some of them claim to be reporters, but they act like commentators and present a repeated narrative rather than complete (factual) news stories. If it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and swims like a duck, it just might be a duck. And so it is with so many “reporters” who sound, look, and act like commentators. Hard to find good reporting, which is sad. The phrase, “yellow dog journalism” was coined a long time ago, so maybe it has always been this way in one form or another.
LikeLike