It is possible that some editor would read the Consumer Reports website and pick up links from there. Our experience is that other websites are often easily fooled, and so their links are relatively all that trustworthy. (That is, picking through someone else's links looking for good ones are often not much more more productive than plain old web searches or even site suggestions. I think we do a bit better than most, but I would NEVER suggest that ANYONE take an ODP listing as an indication that a site (or the related entity) was trustworthy. We list the sites of Microsoft, Sony, the Catholic Church, Scientology (well, everyone agrees at LEAST one of those last two is unreliable!) .... so who then could we turn down? About all we do in terms of "trustworthiness" is that if we get a site claiming to be about a business that apparently doesn't exist, we're likely to not list it. (But we sometimes don't see through even these deceptions!)
I can see how getting a trustworthy list of websites would be valuable. But ... the list is only as reliable as the source. (Consumer Reports did a report on a model of car I owned once: idiots didn't even figure out how the taillights worked. I would read it for ideas about what questions to ask about products: I wouldn't trust their answers further than I could check them.)
Not the viewpoint you expected, I'm sure: but trust is harder to get than a link from a not-particularly-technically-astute journalist.
