Says who?!
This is what the blogosphere has become: a double edged blade.On one hand there are people who can share their ideas, show the world their talent, step on their soapboxes and give other people who actually listen a good shake.
But there are also a lot of presumptuous people with no talent who claim to be writers, journalists, historians, scientists and whatever their fancy is. And so this virtual places are full of self-entitled intellectuals, most of them highly misunderstood by society.
That is ok with me, after all, I am here too, we all are.
What scares me is the fact that for centuries people awed at the printed word. If it was written in a book it had to be true. After the advent of the internet, if it was online it had to be true. Nowadays most people simply Google what they are looking for and accept the output for true.
I searched a few things on Google and came across several blogs. Some of them were accurate on the subject I was looking for, although I couldn’t use a blog as a reference. Others were simply misinformation. Wrong by any standard. I’m sorry I can’t post my queries here, but they were work related, so that is out of the question. Still this really is scary. When we are looking for stuff we really know nothing about all these blogs and wikis can be death traps.
posted by DCveR at 8:52 AM
20 Comments:
I read an article about this long ago, long before wicked wikis and blasted blogs...that the danger of the net is that folks will believe everything they read there.
Ha. I don't even believe what the 'real' journalists write in the daily papers!
But there HAS to be truth somewhere...the key is to know who's info. is valid and whose isn't.
I believe! I believe that one day I will be able to do some work instead of blogging! I am hooked!
GG, DC, and the rest of the guys and gals, you can tell me anything I believe you more than the papers, etc... Cos most of yous are not trying to sell anything! Just looking for a sympathetic ear or pair of eyes...to share bits and bobs with you!
i dont know you guys- even if one doesnt know much about a certain subject, after googling it a few times the "real" story will start to piece together and it will be more or less clear which sources are telling the truth and which are just wanna be-s.
i think alternative info sources -like blogs ofcourse- can help you find the right "SHADE" of the info you're looking for-
like for me its so much more usefull (and iteresting) to read blogs from other countries because i get the feel for the culture and everyday life in a better way than i would from a tourism site (per say) -just an example-
This reminds me of a poetry book I purchased a few months back. The work in it was so pathetic I actually felt sadness in my heart that such trash ever got published. A friend said to me. You want to be published, anybdy can do it now, its easy, but to real writers care about the written word and what they put out for public consumption. These blogs and other such venues can become addictive, simply because so many people don't have lives or they live vicariously through the internet. Sad but true. Hope all is well in your world D.
Icy
GG: I don't usually have problems with that. And even if I can't use a blog as reference for a report, some blogs have references I can check and use. But imagine I was completely ignorant in the subject I was searching.
cream: As far as news are concerned I completely agree with you. I trust any of the bloggers I usually interact with better than a strange news reporter.
tacit: I won't go as far as to judge intention, but there sure is misinformation and gross mistakes.
ale: Ok, now imagine some guy publishes something on the Wikipedia that is wrong and let us say 1000 people cite it. It's Google score is bound to be high. The first hits will reflect it. Someone who knows nothing about it and who doesn't usually question the info received can be wrongly induced.
icy: As far as poets and writers go I don't worry much, their work either stirs emotions or it doesn't. Their work's quality is always relative too, depending on the sensitivity and cultural background of the readers. But when we leave the realms of art and enter the realms of scientific data one can't judge it by the emotions one feels. Then we need to know that data is reliable.
what's a wiki?
bees knees: A a wiki is a web page that can be edited by anybody, like the wikipedia.
Good post. It's scary how we believe what we read. I do agree that we have to be so careful when using the internet for research and double check the source before quoting. Thanks for explaining what a wiki is!
nml: Thank you. Moved your place, huh?
I love the word "Wiki" it makes me think of that breakdancing song "Jam On It" by Newcleus. It goes like this:
Yeah
Jam on it
(Yeah, yeah, we know, we know)
Huh
(Yeah, Goggles, you gonna rock it, right)
(You gonna do it down, right)
Ha-ha-ha-ha, yeah
(Hey, Cozmo, what's the name of this again)
(I forgot)
Jam on it
(Oh)
(Oh, Chilly B, get down, ho)
(Oh, oh, here comes Cozmo)
(Ho)
(We get to say wikki-wikki-wikki again)
Wikki-wikki-wikki-wikki
(Shut up)
Wikki-wikki-wikki-wikki
hree words to the whack, step yourself back
Just gettin' down, and you then you're givin' no slack
Like a Burger King with a sack of Big Macs
We're throwin' down with the radical sacks
On time, in your mind you see
You gotta boogie to your best ability
You gotta funk it up until it knocks you down
And when you're funkin' up, be sure to pass it around
Come on, let's go to work
We got what'll make your body jerk
Make you throw your hands up in the air
Shake your booty and scream, "Oh, yeah"
‘Cause we are the Jam On Crew
And jammin' on it is how we do the do
We'll funk you up until you boogie down
So come people check out the sound
Wikki-wikki-wikki-wikki
(Shut up)
Wikki-wikki-wikki-wikki
It scares me too. The internet is a good place to get started-- with all these libraries online nowadays you can at least find where you can find the info in a book. But I would never quote something from a website. Any website. It's no better than saying "A friend of a friend said...." No thanks, I'll stick to books and journals. And I would fail any paper that ever came to me with a website as a source. Bah!
jcb: Welcome. Got to try and listen that one, don't think I've ever had.
viking: What if people were writing stuff that is published in magazines using the internet as a source? But yes, you're right, that is the only solution.
Recently I did some studying that made much of teaching us to ensure the validation of information sources. While before this was a skill mainly confined to the academic, with the internet this ability to discern between a reliable source of information and a bad one is becoming necessary for people as young as six or seven doing research for a paper on volcanoes.
IMHO The new literacy is not going to be reading, or computer use, but the ability to filter sources and understand what their slant is. And like the spread of books and of radio, TV and the Internet, access should democratise and de-elitise that literacy of discernment.
Perhaps then people can apply it when they vote!
aunty marianne: Educated voters? People actually thinking before voting instead of following tradition or trends? You mean politicians actually having to prove to the people they are the best choice?
That is the technocratic version of heaven, right? Yes, I would love that!
Every reader has to be critical. I have noticed when teaching, that some students who have been raised in a culture where you accept the word of your leader, the criptures or where there is a high analphabetism, are less likely to be critical towards what they read and also that they find it a bit harder to analyze texts.
Just came to think about it when reading this, since i earlier on was trying to post something abot the importance of being critical and that maybe knowing facts has lost its importance these days.. just maybe.
lovan: Maybe it has not lost importance, maybe it just shows more. My point is some time ago only a few people had access to some information. Those who did were used to question it, like academia. Perhaps today the number of people who question information is proportionally the same and the difference is only on the number of people who access that info.
I think you said you originally found my blog by googling Hawaii subjects? So in that sense, googling blogs introduced us as friends.. which can only be considered a good thing, yes?
kris: The problem is not coming across blogs when using google, is coming across wrong information and accepting it.
Yes. Whether that information is authoritative or not. That was one of the selling points we used when selling the online encylopedias to the schools. (Glad I have dropped that line of work!)
Google definitely serves a purpose, but searcher beware!
For instance, I see a lot of odd search strings on my blog stats. I can't tell you how many have searched 'cane spider' and got to me! Am I an authority on them? No. Just mentioned them one time.
And remember that post with all the Big Island facts? I researched them pretty well, but I am certainly no authority!!
kris: There is only so much market for online encyclopedias, most of all living on an island... ok, I admit I always laugh when you mention selling encyclopedias.
Post a Comment
<< Home