I think the important point to consider here is where the incentives are. People generally follow the incentives, and even if they don't there's the perception

I think the important point to consider here is where the incentives are. People generally follow the incentives, and even if they don't there's the perception that they do -- in a case of reviewing a site or a book this kills credibility. In the consumer-review industry, for example, I think we all can say that we trust Consumer Reports, their incentive being to give the most accurate information because they rely on a revenue stream from the consumer. If they don't give accurate information, they won't be trusted and their customers will stop paying. On the other hand there's Top Ten Reviews, who perform a similar service as Consumer Reports, but do reviews on software and other technology products. Their business model is to include affiliate links for each of their products - this gives them the incentive to find the highest-paying commissions and best-converting landing pages. They have little incentive to give the best information because of where their revenue comes from. I think that most savvy people don't trust them. It's true that there will always be a "sucker" who won't realize the conflict of interest and will buy a product - this fact allows Top Ten Reviews and sites like them to be profitable. But they will never gain the trust or stature of Consumer Reviews, because the savvy visitors won't rely on the information they have, and savvy honest people won't recommend the site to others. I'm in class so I don't have time to edit this to make sure my arguments flow without any logical inconsistencies, but you get the idea.