Determining the reliability and authority of a source: E-E-A-T friendly content.

Among the criteria now formalized by Google via E-E-A-T are expertise and authority. When it comes to creating content, we have to be extremely demanding when it comes to the sources we use. Are they reputable? Have they been validated by industry professionals? Are they relevant? What's the difference between experience, expertise and authority?

To answer these questions, Euphonie Studio has produced a podcast episode dedicated to the question of the reliability and authority of sources. This podcast is audio content created by Euphonie Studio, an ASSONANCE brand for the agency's editorial projects.

In this discussion, you will hear from :

• Syphaïwong BAY, (🐦‍⬛ @ecribouille) founder of ASSONANCE for the Content Marketing point of view;

• Eva Belgherbi, (🐦‍⬛ @berthe_chorizot), researcher and PhD student in art history(notebook Hypotheses.org) for the scientific point of view;
  Portrait: ©Ennio Grazioli

• Julie Guesdon (🐦‍⬛ @guesdon), journalist at the moment for Paris-Normandie and the Club de la Communication et de la Presse de Normandie for the journalistic point of view.

Selected extracts:

Is it easier today to become a source of authority through publication?

We note that these days, it's easier to access expertise and knowledge directly online, which can be advantageous as it shortens the path to relevant information. However, we also raise concerns about the validation and reliability of this web-based data. For example, in the field of cooking, many people publish books without necessarily having validated expertise, which can lead to the propagation of erroneous information. The same phenomenon is observed in the field of art history, where subjects such as gender studies have become popular, but some publications lack scientific foundation and are made by inexperienced people. This contrasts with researchers and experts who have undergone academic training and gained significant experience in their field. This proliferation of non-validated content online poses challenges for us, who have to sort out and distinguish credible from less reliable sources.

How can we select a source when we're pressed for time?

The process of producing articles depends on the urgency and time available. The audiovisual industry, for example, sometimes demands very tight deadlines, which can lead to the need to call on appropriate contacts, even if they are not necessarily experts in the field in question. This creates reliability problems. When more time is available, the approach is to seek out reliable academic sources and contact experts for interviews. However, even academic sources can lack objectivity, as researchers have their own interests to defend. So cross-checking information with different people becomes essential to get a more balanced view and get closer to the truth. It's essential to avoid relying on a single source.

A reliable, authoritative source may have a biased point of view.

Bias exists in interviewing and information gathering. Interviewees often respond according to what they think we want to hear. This creates confirmation bias. However, the most important thing is undoubtedly to obtain authentic answers by encouraging interviewees to tell us what really happened. Bias also exists in academic research, where researchers are influenced by their readings and sources, which can lead to biased hypotheses. No one is free from bias, because we're all human, and even in research methodology, choices are made. These can create distortions!

The way we search for and consume information is changing over time

With the advent of social networks and mobile applications, information access practices are changing. More and more people don't know how to search for information in depth, and get their information mainly through platforms like TikTok or Instagram. However, there are questions about the reliability and neutrality of these platforms, which are run by private companies and may censor certain content. This dependence on digital platforms can affect the perception of information and access to sources and experts, as personal experience can prevail over more rigorous studies and analysis. The funding of studies and the possible influence of lobbies on the results presented to the public make things difficult for the general public. Distinguishing reliable sources becomes complex. Raising public awareness of these issues is a challenge.