Most and least trusted

31 comments on “Most and least trusted ”

• Comments are now closed

1. John Dalley 1

   29 June 2010 at 8:05 pm

   Wow John Key @ 70, four better than Eric Watson. People must be catching on to his lack of trust worthiness!
   • Sideoiler 1.1

     29 June 2010 at 11:38 pm

     And Phil Goff is where ?
     • BLiP 1.1.1

       29 June 2010 at 11:43 pm

       On that list, he’s looking down on Blinglish. Pretty much like the rest of the country.
2. Jenny 2

   29 June 2010 at 8:27 pm

   I wonder where Sue Bradford would come on this list?

   Up there with Corporal Apiata, or down there with Hone Harawira?

   I tried to find the link to past surveys to check, but had no luck.

   Can anyone recall her placing?
3. BLiP 3

   29 June 2010 at 8:27 pm

   Its fun to take the piss out of those at the bottom of the list, but I wonder about the validity. It seems more a measure of popularity than trust.
   • Carol 3.1

     29 June 2010 at 8:37 pm

     Down there with Roger Douglas. And John Key has dropped down the list since last year.
     http://www.readersdigest.co.nz/new_zealand_s_most_trusted_people_2009
     • I dreamed a dream 3.1.1

       30 June 2010 at 9:18 am

       Wow! Huge drop for John Key, from 53 to 70! Is that telling us something?
   • Draco T Bastard 3.2

     30 June 2010 at 12:48 am

     Yeah, that’s what I was thinking as well.
4. Carol 4

   29 June 2010 at 8:30 pm

   And I see Helen Clark is more trusted than John Key. Why do sports people feature so highly?
   • Gooner 4.1

     29 June 2010 at 8:40 pm

     Because people like Robin Brooke are very nice people and equally trustworthy.
   • Jenny 4.2

     29 June 2010 at 9:36 pm

     Thanks for that Carol.
     The real humour seems to be in the rises and falls each year. For instance the Queen at number 19 last year, is tied equal with Dan Vettori at number 18 this year. (Number 19 seems to have been abolished this year).

     Is the Queen going up or down, or has she always been 19?

     Come to think of it, she was 19 on our coins for a very long time.

     And that thing about sports people?

     It seems that by a large margin they are the most trusted individuals in the population of New Zealand.

     What’s with that?

     Is it the same in every other country where Readers Digest do this survey, or is it just a New Zealand thing?

     And then, Sue Bradford, if she was on the list where would she be now, up or down?

     Who knows?

     Now that she is no longer a politician and now considers herself just an activist. I was wondering; Is an activist more, or less trusted than a politician?

     Talking of activists I wonder where John Minto would be on the list. And, were it possible, could Hone Harawira drop even further if he was still just an activist.

     The questions just keep on coming. I wonder if such an important survey shouldn’t be given even more prominent billing by our MSM?
5. the sprout 5

   29 June 2010 at 9:04 pm

   Anyone notice how when TV3 ran this story last night they showed a clip of Chris Carter when they discussed the most untrustworthy – despite hm not even appearing on the list!

   Coincidence I’m sure. They don’t really have a vendetta against him 😆

   Great to see people seeing Hide and Douglas for what they are – I don’t fancy their chances at the next election.
6. Gooner 6

   29 June 2010 at 9:11 pm

   Oh come on now sprout, we all know these are a crock of shit. After all, Irene van Dyk is at #9 – how does anyone know she can be “trusted”? Do you know that sprout? Do I? No.

   This thing is weird; Lockwood Smith is below Eric Watson and Louise Nicholas is # No 58 – does that mean she’s a liar sprout?
   • the sprout 6.1

     29 June 2010 at 9:19 pm

     agreed, methodologivally it’s probably even worse than a Herald poll – but likely to have at leat some ordinal validity.
     good for a laugh all the same.
   • Pete 6.2

     29 June 2010 at 9:51 pm

     I tend to agree with Danyl’s assessment of the survey “the whole thing is really a measure of vague, inarticulate prejudice rather than trust”:
     http://dimpost.wordpress.com/2010/06/29/trust/
7. Bill 7

   29 June 2010 at 10:17 pm

   “telemarketers (40), politicians (39) and sex workers (38) took the bottom three spots”

   So a politician is basically a whore on the end of a communication device, who is ultimately in business for somebody other than you?

   Yup, I can buy that.
8. tsmithfield 8

   29 June 2010 at 10:21 pm

   Politicians are always likely to end up near the bottom because there will always be a substantial slice of the population who doesn’t like politicians of opposing political persausions.
9. Issy 9

   29 June 2010 at 11:46 pm

   Thanks for that Carol.The real humour seems to be in the rises and falls each year. For instance the Queen at number 19 last year, is tied equal with Dan Vettori at number 18 this year. (Number 19 seems to have been abolished this year).
   +1
10. John Dalley 10

    29 June 2010 at 11:57 pm

    @sideoiler old chump. Your mate Smile and wave is supposed to be the best thing since sliced bread. Close to the Messiah and fearless leader on the National Party, so 7oth?
    looks like that slide from grace is a coming.
    • I dreamed a dream 10.1

      30 June 2010 at 9:19 am

      Yeah, dropping from 53 in 2009 to 70 now is a rather huge drop! Big slide from grace?
11. Graham 11

    30 June 2010 at 8:04 am

    The list is very much people’s prejudices and biases in evidence, and I suspect the respondants go with their gut feeling rather than any reasoned analysis.

    Examples: Look at all the sports people near the top. They may be great at their sports, and many of them are involved in very worthy activities away from the sports field, but how do people really know they can trust them?

    Jo Seager, Peta Mathias? What?!

    John Campbell at number 33???!!!

    Hone Harawira at number 85: I can’t stand the man, but this example presents interesting points. What do we mean by “most trusted”? Do you trust them to stand up for what they believe in? Well surely Hone would have to come near the top. Or is it trusting them to always do what’s right and good for the majority. I certainly don’t trust him on that.

    Sue Bradford was number 81 last year. Most people who I have heard comment on Sue would actually say that she is very trustworthy – even if you don’t like her politics, you know what she stands for, and she does not back down from her beliefs.
12. vto 12

    30 June 2010 at 8:33 am

    does this concern the likes of Hone do you think?
    • Graham 12.1

      30 June 2010 at 9:30 am

      Not at all I suspect. After all he quite famously said he didn’t give a s*** what Mr Mikaere or anybody else thought.

      Although would it concern him if it was members of his electorate? Hmmm …
13. I dreamed a dream 13

    30 June 2010 at 9:21 am

    At least the ratings between Goff and Key are evening up a lot!
14. Tom 14

    30 June 2010 at 9:38 am

    Interesting to note the MSM moritorium on negative reportage of John Key means his dramatic fall from 53 to 70 between the 2009 and 2010 surveys is not reported. Surely that is a genuine ‘news’ angle, yet like the others, the Herald story didn’t even mention John Key’s rating.
    • joe bloggs 14.1

      30 June 2010 at 11:03 am

      Equally interesting to note the MSM moritorium on negative reportage of Phil Goff means his consistently poor showing (73 in 2009 and 76 in 2010) is not reported.

      Surely that is a genuine ‘news’ angle, yet like the others, the Herald story didn’t even mention Phil Goff’s rating…

      And not forgetting the fact that Helen Clark still significantly outranks Phil – also not mentioned….

      … yawn
      • I dreamed a dream 14.1.1

        30 June 2010 at 1:11 pm

        We all know Phil Goff’s rating is low anyway, so nothing new there and therefore not much newsworthiness. If Goff suddenly shoots up the scale, then that would be newsworthy. Also, so what Helen outranks Phil? That’s nothing new and not really newsworthy.

        But popular John Key took a big dive in the trustworthiness ratings, from 53 to 70 — that’s a humongous drop! Now, that’s why it is newsworthy. But, the MSM’s got to protect their star.
15. True Blue 15

    30 June 2010 at 10:56 am

    Where is Len Brown?
    • I dreamed a dream 15.1

      30 June 2010 at 1:13 pm

      It is very likely that when the survey was commissioned, Len Brown wasn’t a national figure yet. It’s only in recent months that he’s a character of interest nationally. I’d say the next survey will include him.
16. Graham 16

    30 June 2010 at 1:36 pm

    Keep in mind this survey is, from the RD’s description, a survey of 85 people (presumably chosen by either RD or their research firm “The Leading Edge”) ranked compared to one another. So to my (admittedly non-statistician’s) mind it’s a bit difficult to define it as a “most-trusted” or “least-trusted” list. It’s just one person compared to 84 others.

    “Reader’s Digest commissioned independent research firm The Leading Edge to survey a representative sample of 500 New Zealand adults. They were asked to rate how much they trusted
    85 well-known people on a scale of one to ten.”

Links to post

1. The Standard: posted on 29 June 2010 at 7:46 am

• Comments are now closed

• Log in
• Donate
• Contribute post

• Articles RSS