I think this has been touched upon in various points so far, but it seems to me that surveys like these are bit obscure because it:
A. Depends on who is doing the survey, i.e. who sponsored the survey and why?
B. What did they ask to obtain any results, and particularly the result that blogger's are the least trustworthy?
C. Who did they ask - who were their sample, and how did they decide that those people should be their sample - what were the parameters of the sample?
D. Would their "sample", i.e. the people they asked, be knowledgeable enough to give an unbiased and true answer about the things they were being asked about?
I know this is true of any kind of survey, but to use an extreme - there's no point in asking Trappist monks who spend their time alone up a hill somewhere, anything about the internet, is there?
And..... trusted for what
I mean, if we took an international news item as the content that we were applying and as the content we measuring against all the mediums....... it's not rocket science to suggest that the blogger would be last on the Trusted List, and the international news company be first.
But, if there was a local event - carnival, or natural disaster - would the pictures, word, stories, of the local bloggers be more "trustworthy" than an international news medium? (Of course, from a search point of view the local blog would unlikely to be found on the internet as well!
Am I trusted? I was approached last week by an online article writing company to write a sponsored blog piece about a road safety campaign being sponsored by a major UK insurance company. I published the piece on my blog. They are paying me quite handsomely for it as well! So..... am I trusted? The insurance company has hired the article writing company - so they trust them. The article writing company sought me out - so they trust me. The item has been written and gained a place in Google search results - so Google trusts me, (otherwise that piece and my blog would have dropped out of the SERPs). Am I a trusted blogger?
As a piece of fantastic journalism - my blog piece is not. But that's not was I was hired to do. I did a job as per the "brief" from the article writing company/car insurance company. Anybody reading it will be "informed, educated and entertained" - as most mediums try to do. It will win no Pulitzer prize, and will not be featured in "The Greatest Book Of Internet Writing" - but it fulfills it's objectives, and therefore is a "trusted" piece of writing as far as the car insurance company, the article writing company and myself are concerned.
Of course, it may not be perceived
as a trusted blog piece, but rather as some spammy piece of writing thrown up onto the internet with some pics, videos and a few links - which is essentially what it is. So is the idea of "trust" being only in the "eye of the beholder" because these are the people who view the item, and are also on the receiving end of the survey being quizzed about what they've seen?
I think the whole idea of "trust" on these types of surveys has too may variables just to say that "one medium is more trusted than another" based on a few questions and not taking into consideration "content", or how that content has come about.
Interesting topic for discussion - good one Egol