Howard Rheingold's article Crap Detection 101 discussed the issues of online search engines and how a person can tell the difference between a factually accurate website and a website that is not as reliable, otherwise known as CRAP. In his article Rheingold makes suggestions about things search engine users should look for. Let's look at the article in question and go through the steps of checking the Currency, Reliability, Authority, and Purpose.
Currency
The article is an article with fairly current information since it was posted on 30 June 2009. The article is relevant in saying that many people are willing to take information on the IInternet at face value, everything should be double checked and searched. There are comments at the bottom of the page that discuss this article as very valuable and that "[it] should be required reading". Comments like these suggest that people around the world are finding the article helpful and relevant to their lives today. The relevancy of the article also speaks to the currency of the topic. If the comments made January 8, 2009 say that the article should still be required reading obviously people still think this way. Based only on Currency and Relevancy we can determine this article to have passed the first half of the CRAP test.
Reliability
The article provides many a lot of good opinion information, but let us look into the reliablity of the author and the sources used in this article. The author, Howard Rheingold, has authority to write on the subject due to the fact that he is a professor at several universities in the communication and journalism programs. The man is very credible, however some of his links are not. His link to Canter and Siegel is to a wikipeadia source which is not very highly esteemed as a reliable source and wikipeadia itself says, "this biography of a living person does not cite any references or sources".
Authority
Rheingold, based on his credentials has great authority to speak on the topic of invetigating online sources since he teaches this very topic at various Universities. The story about teaching his daughter how to investiagte online sources also gives his authority to other parents as he portrays himself as a concerned parent.
Purpose
Based on the authors background and the tone of the article it is both opinon and fact. As a protective parent this is an opinion peiece based on how people use the internet. He cannot assume to know that everyone who uses search engines is oblivious to how to double check an online source as he does; however, he is right in saying that many people do not check the accuracy of the information they find online. In exploring his own opinion Rheingold checked many facts and wrote a very factual article based on his opinion. The point of the article is to inform and warn internet users how to double-check every page and every source they use.
Conclusion
In my opinion this article largely follows its own rules. The author is credible and has authority to be speaking on the subject. The information is current and timely and reflects almost universal truths. The point which could use some refinement would be in selecting better links, a link which goes to wikipeadia and does not source anything requiers a second look.
image from: http://www.cartoonstock.com/newscartoons/cartoonists/jdu/lowres/jdun425l.jpg
No comments:
Post a Comment