authenticity vs. sincerity

I found this interesting post at Fast Company which talks about the difference between authenticity and sincerity.

We talk a lot about companies needing to be authentic in order to have a true conversation with people. But this post made me consider if that is possible. Everyone knows companies need to make money and know that they are beholden to the financial markets. But they do not want to know that. They do not want to really know the inner machinations of these organizations - frankly it might frighten people to much if they did know what goes on in the proverbial sausage factory.

What people want from brands is sincerity, which Patterson describes as

"presenting oneself to the world according to standards of social interaction, concealing socially unacceptable feelings in favor of behaviors that, although they may exist on the surface only, function to keep non-intimate relationships running smoothly."

What does this really mean. One interpretation is that what people really want is for brands to be more human and behave according to inerpersonal standards. This seems to cover a lot of ground: from how you engage with people (not shputing or interrupting them is ussaually a good start) to how you treat them (listen to them, don;t screw them).

Can the Golden Rule be the simplest way to talk about how brands should act in a web 2.0 world?