First off, when verifying information set in articles and postings, we have to look at the currency of the article, in other words is it current? In the case of the article "Crap Detection 101" by Howard Rheingold, the article was written more than half a year ago (June 30, 2009). This makes the article somewhat out of date but I think that what is written still has merits when performing fact checks today. Obviously this cannot be the most reliable source for this kind of information due to when it was written, but it is still relevant.
As for the reliability, the information is there but I still feel like I ought to question some of the things that are written. There are a lot of book titles, and websites to go to so you can check some facts, which I feel adds to the credibility of this article. Overall I think that it is a fairly reliable source.
There is no shortage of authority when it comes to the author of this article. Howard Rheingold has written a couple of books (Tools for Thought, The Virtual Community, and Smart Mobs) as well as being an editor (Whole Earth Review, The Millenium Whole Earth Catalog). He has even spent some time as a teacher at UC Berkely. He possesses the pedigree that leads me to believe he is a credible source.
So we come to the last portion of the crap test: Perspective/Point of View, and I think that Rheingold has a perspective that should be well respected when it comes to this field. As a former teacher I would be willing to guess that he has spent some time fact checking himself and therefore I feel his opinion and information is valid.
Image taken from http://www.lvpcchurch.org/lvpc/files/u1/magnifying-glass.gif
No comments:
Post a Comment