Do You Trust Your “Friends?”

Ralph Waldo Emerson once said, “The only way to have a friend is to be one.”  Written before the advent of Facebook where now, the way to have not just one, but potentially hundreds of friends (the noun), is to “friend” (the verb) just about anyone.  Granted, some are more vigilant than others in how they manage their friend lists as overall, we are seeing a dilution in the meaning of the word.  People now often qualify with “Facebook friend” when talking about others, indicating a looser affiliation than that of perhaps a true “friend.”  This indicates a greater adaptation of social media into the mainstream and is reflected in this year’s Canadian Trust Barometer data where “a person like me” has switched places with “CEO” as a trusted information source signaling the return of the expert as credible information source for Canadians.

The CEO still lags behind an academic or expert/technical experts but overall, the data indicates that based on the question asked (Who do you trust for information about a company?) Canadians are looking for credentialed spokespeople and are demonstrating a desire for authority and accountability.  Of course, this comes in the wake of the financial crisis, the oil spill in the Gulf and even Canada’s own Maple Leaf Foods tainted product issue, so it’s somewhat expected.

What the data also indicates is that whereas in 2009 we may have been apt to believe things we read on social networking sites, we have now incorporated social media into our lives as one of several information sources.  In our offices we often use the phrase that people need to hear information 3-5 times from as many different sources before they believe it (providing your brand has a good reputation – if not, that number goes down to as low as just once).  Translation: our social media “friends” are now naturally included as one of many information sources, particularly when it comes to news and crises.

This is key when considering communications strategy – there is still nuance in who we trust for what kind of information.  The obvious strategy for reputation management is to ensure that if ever the brand could be faced with a crisis, it remains important to maximize ongoing relationships and affiliations with credible third parties such as NGOs and credible experts long beforehand.  “People like me” are now less likely to cause significant reputation damage in crisis however, other experts will continue to comment on the situation in both social and traditional media.  It is important that they have the facts, trust the source and are therefore potentially able to help mitigate damages.

For consumer brand communications, when it comes to who we trust for less critical information, such as what computer to buy or where to go for great sushi, this is where the power of friends on social networks still reign.  Many would trust even a loosely affiliated “Facebook friend” for a brand recommendation more than they would a CEO.  This is also reflected in the Trust data where “regular employee” is still trusted more than the CEO for information about a company. Think of a time when you might have received biased recommendations from friends who recommend their places of work unabashedly, but you take their recommendations at face value.

So for smart consumer brands, “friends” remain a powerful tool of influence for reputation, recommendations and mindshare.  In light of the 2011 Trust data, brand managers should ask themselves, how do I garner trust for my brand among our “friends” on social media sites if “people like me” continue to decline in influence?  Should we “friend” an expert?  Mobilize employees?  How do we deepen our relationships?

Ultimately, the answers lie in ensuring that in social media brands continue to provide relevant content, are authentic and transparent and available in good times and bad.  So, turns out, Emerson’s wise words actually remain true today, particularly in social media, because aren’t these attributes pretty much what you’d expect from a friend?