|
The legitimacy of internet sources vs others
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Psy-T |
what makes one source more valid than another in your view?
lepanto suggests it's presence in print does, i disagree - for i am unaware of any way to enforce the validity of printed documents. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
bring a website into court or bring a printed signed document into court and see which one holds up :haha:
good luck winning this with ME ;)
What is Unreliable Information on the Internet?
Information on the Internet may misrepresent the truth, be out of date, biased or just incorrect.
For example, racist websites may claim to tell or represent the truth about complex social, cultural or historical issues in ways that appear logical and plausible.
Hoax websites may portray themselves as another organisation and fraudulently ask for donations of money. Often these types of sites not only contain unreliable information but are also criminal in their activity.
Websites that broadcast news and events may also provide unreliable information in the sense that the activity could be reported incorrectly or reveal a bias to a particular view point.
In a similar way, personal websites and newsgroups could have opinions published on them which may be confused by some for the truth.
Due to the enormous amount of information published on the Internet, both reliable and unreliable information is freely available. Information can easily be published without it being checked over, approved, confirmed or verified in any way.
Publication Process
Print Sources: Traditional print sources go through an extensive publication process that includes editing and article review. The process has fact-checkers, multiple reviewers, and editors to ensure quality of publication.
Internet Sources: Anyone with a computer and access to the Internet can publish a website or electronic document. Most web documents do not have editors, fact-checkers, or other types of reviewers.
Authorship and Affiliations
Print Sources: Print sources clearly indicate who the author is, what organization(s) he or she is affiliated with, and when his or her work was published.
Internet Sources: Authorship and affiliations are difficult to determine on the Internet. Some sites my have author and sponsorship listed, but many do not.
Sources and Quotations
Print Sources: In most traditional publications, external sources of information and direct quotations are clearly marked and identified.
Internet Sources: Sources the author used or referred to in the text may not be clearly indicated in an Internet source.
Bias and Special Interests
Print Sources: While bias certainly exists in traditional publications, printing is more expensive and difficult to accomplish. Most major publishers are out to make a profit and will either not cater to special interest groups or will clearly indicate when they are when they are catering to special interest groups.
Internet Sources: The purpose of the online text may be misleading. A website that appears to be factual may actually be persuasive and/or deceptive.
Author Qualifications
Print Sources: Qualifications of an author are almost always necessary for print sources. Only qualified authors are likely to have their manuscripts accepted for publication.
Internet Sources: Even if the author and purpose of a website can be determined, the qualifications of the author are not always given.
Publication Information
Print Sources: Publication information such as date of publication, publisher, author, and editor are always clearly listed in print publications.
Internet Sources: Dates of publication and timeliness of information are questionable on the internet. Dates listed on websites could be the date posted, date updated, or a date may not be listed at all. |
|
|
| Psy-T |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
Information on the Internet may misrepresent the truth, be out of date, biased or just incorrect. |
as opposed to information in print, how?
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
Print Sources: Traditional print sources go through an extensive publication process that includes editing and article review. The process has fact-checkers, multiple reviewers, and editors to ensure quality of publication.
Print Sources: Print sources clearly indicate who the author is, what organization(s) he or she is affiliated with, and when his or her work was published.
|
you have still not proved any necessity or method of enforcing these measures, you just stipulated they are the norm.
as if there's a lack of one-man-produced prints?
another case in point: tabloids.
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
Print Sources: In most traditional publications, external sources of information and direct quotations are clearly marked and identified. |
In many internet publications, external sources of information and direct quotations are clearly marked and identified.
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
Print Sources: While bias certainly exists in traditional publications, printing is more expensive and difficult to accomplish. Most major publishers are out to make a profit and will either not cater to special interest groups or will clearly indicate when they are when they are catering to special interest groups. |
...
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
Print Sources: Qualifications of an author are almost always necessary for print sources. Only qualified authors are likely to have their manuscripts accepted for publication. |
and what is it that makes an author qualified? |
|
|
| josh4 |
| quote: | Journal: Wikipedia as accurate as Britannica
Nature study covered side-by-side comparison of scientific topics
SAN FRANCISCO, California (AP) -- Wikipedia, the encyclopedia that relies on volunteers to pen nearly 4 million articles, is about as accurate in covering scientific topics as Encyclopedia Britannica, the journal Nature wrote in an online article published Wednesday.
The finding, based on a side-by-side comparison of articles covering a broad swath of the scientific spectrum, comes as Wikipedia faces criticism over the accuracy of some of its entries.
Two weeks ago prominent journalist John Seigenthaler, the former publisher of the Tennessean newspaper and founding editorial director of USA Today, revealed that a Wikipedia entry that ran for four months had incorrectly named him as a longtime suspect in the assassinations of president John F. Kennedy and his brother Robert.
Such errors appear to be the exception rather than the rule, Nature said in Wednesday's article, which the scientific journal said was the first to use peer review to compare Wikipedia to Britannica. Based on 42 articles reviewed by experts, the average scientific entry in Wikipedia contained four errors or omissions, while Britannica had three.
Of eight "serious errors" the reviewers found -- including misinterpretations of important concepts -- four came from each source, the journal reported.
"We're very pleased with the results and we're hoping it will focus people's attention on the overall level of our work, which is pretty good," said Jimmy Wales, who founded St. Petersburg, Florida-based Wikipedia in 2001.
Wales said the accuracy of his project varies by topic, with strong suits including pop culture and contemporary technology. That's because Wikipedia's stable of dedicated volunteers tend to have more collective expertise in such areas, he said.
The site tends to lag when it comes to topics touching on the humanities, such as the winner of the Nobel Prize for literature for a particular year, Wales said.
Next month, Wikipedia plans to begin testing a new mechanism for reviewing the accuracy of its articles. The group also is working on ways to make its review process easier to use by people who have less familiarity with computers and the Internet.
Encyclopedia Britannica officials declined to comment on the findings because they haven't seen the data. But spokesman Tom Panelas said such comparisons, assuming they're conducted correctly, are valuable "because they tell us things you wouldn't know otherwise."
While some Britannica officials have publicly criticized Wikipedia's quality in the past, Panelas praised the free service for having the speed and breadth to keep up on topics such as "extreme ironing." The sport, in which competitors iron clothing in remote locations, is not covered in Britannica.
Britannica researchers plan to review the Nature study and correct any errors discovered, Panelas said.
Unlike Britannica, which charges for its content and pays a staff of experts to research and write its articles, Wikipedia gives away its content for free and allows anyone -- amateur or professional, expert or novice -- to submit and edit entries.
Wikipedia, which boasts 3.7 million articles in 200 languages, is the 37th most visited Web site on the Internet, according to the research service Alexa.
Find this article at:
http://edition.cnn.com/2005/TECH/in...a.ap/index.html |
i posted this in another thread a while ago
http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...threadid=311838 |
|
|
| Marc Summers |
| My favorite thing is when people try debating in the PDD, and all they do is quote an article from a website. It's humorous. |
|
|
| tiesto14 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
bring a website into court or bring a printed signed document into court and see which one holds up :haha:
good luck winning this with ME ;)
What is Unreliable Information on the Internet?
Information on the Internet may misrepresent the truth, be out of date, biased or just incorrect.
For example, racist websites may claim to tell or represent the truth about complex social, cultural or historical issues in ways that appear logical and plausible.
Hoax websites may portray themselves as another organisation and fraudulently ask for donations of money. Often these types of sites not only contain unreliable information but are also criminal in their activity.
Websites that broadcast news and events may also provide unreliable information in the sense that the activity could be reported incorrectly or reveal a bias to a particular view point.
In a similar way, personal websites and newsgroups could have opinions published on them which may be confused by some for the truth.
Due to the enormous amount of information published on the Internet, both reliable and unreliable information is freely available. Information can easily be published without it being checked over, approved, confirmed or verified in any way.
Publication Process
Print Sources: Traditional print sources go through an extensive publication process that includes editing and article review. The process has fact-checkers, multiple reviewers, and editors to ensure quality of publication.
Internet Sources: Anyone with a computer and access to the Internet can publish a website or electronic document. Most web documents do not have editors, fact-checkers, or other types of reviewers.
Authorship and Affiliations
Print Sources: Print sources clearly indicate who the author is, what organization(s) he or she is affiliated with, and when his or her work was published.
Internet Sources: Authorship and affiliations are difficult to determine on the Internet. Some sites my have author and sponsorship listed, but many do not.
Sources and Quotations
Print Sources: In most traditional publications, external sources of information and direct quotations are clearly marked and identified.
Internet Sources: Sources the author used or referred to in the text may not be clearly indicated in an Internet source.
Bias and Special Interests
Print Sources: While bias certainly exists in traditional publications, printing is more expensive and difficult to accomplish. Most major publishers are out to make a profit and will either not cater to special interest groups or will clearly indicate when they are when they are catering to special interest groups.
Internet Sources: The purpose of the online text may be misleading. A website that appears to be factual may actually be persuasive and/or deceptive.
Author Qualifications
Print Sources: Qualifications of an author are almost always necessary for print sources. Only qualified authors are likely to have their manuscripts accepted for publication.
Internet Sources: Even if the author and purpose of a website can be determined, the qualifications of the author are not always given.
Publication Information
Print Sources: Publication information such as date of publication, publisher, author, and editor are always clearly listed in print publications.
Internet Sources: Dates of publication and timeliness of information are questionable on the internet. Dates listed on websites could be the date posted, date updated, or a date may not be listed at all. |
DING DING DING DING...we have a winner!!
You are so friggen right....this is why conspiracy nuts love the internet because they read something on the net about Bush and 9.11 and they take it as the truth...if any of it was true it would be on the front page of the NY Times or some other paper. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| quote: | Originally posted by tiesto14
DING DING DING DING...we have a winner!!
You are so friggen right....this is why conspiracy nuts love the internet because they read something on the net about Bush and 9.11 and they take it as the truth...if any of it was true it would be on the front page of the NY Times or some other paper. |
haha you're like carlos mencia. people think it and you say it/type/post it.
duh ofcourse. but wait...the governmet controlled rightist media will never print "the truth" (DUM DUM DUM!) ;) :p |
|
|
| stevieboy32808 |
| quote: | | Originally posted by Lepanto |
I think you should have came out with and just say that you hate it when people quote stuff in the PDD section for research purposes and pass it off as fact. That would have been much better. Personally I think this is what you meant so let's pick it up here. Now correct me if I'm wrong, but you state that internet sources are invalid because they are filled with biases and subject to much needed verification as opposed to printed sources.
As you know the internet can be used for countless purposes, one of which is to conduct studies and research. Ever since the explosion of the internet in late '95/early '96 there has been an inversely proportional rise and decline to the number of people frequenting libraries as oppose to those finding their research online (2002 study done by the Online Computer Library Center, http://www.oclc.org/). Many college students resort to these means because of convenience. During the hunt for this research we often encounter all kinds of media such as "streaming audio/video and online broadcasts of radio and television programming from around the world are readily accessible with high-quality sound, to play through RealPlayer, Windows Media Player, and Winamp. [Some] examples would be the BCC World Service http://www.bbc.co.uk/worldservice/index.shtmli and the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation hhttp://www.cbc.cai", MSNBC, Associated Press, and the AmericanFreePress. Even "most of the top-selling [printed sources such as] textbooks now feature a companion online site with interactive teaching and learning resources, chapter by chapter, including suggested Internet sources on that site and in the text. Publishers are offering various types of online products as supplements for course topics, sometimes independent of the particular text used, and as coursepacks.There are also some excellent paid options to access high-quality scholarship and other academic material online, some of which are available for individual as well as library subscription (Ettinger, 2002; Golderman and Connolly, 2002).
There are also websites run by reference e-librarians that keep track of legitimate and valid content online to prevent any of the bias or journalistic errors you were talking about. "Many university and college libraries have webpages or handout sheets on searching for and evaluating web sources, that tend to direct students toward peer-reviewed, academic, scholarly, or governmental sites."
My point is that an internet source is just as valid as a printed source. It's just a matter of knowing where to look to find those legitamite sources that poses the problem.
I guess the next big question on your mind is can those sources be used in a court of law? The short answer is yes if it is considered evidence to the case or if it is a direct interpretation of a law.
But if you still insist the to argue the legal part of your statement then consider this: To follow up on your judicial argument how do you explain internet related crimes such as violation of intellectual property, statuatory violations, ethical violations, and consumer fraud?
Let's start with:
- Intellectual Property Rights - So you just made a script that can speed up the internet 100 times faster on a dial-up modem. You want to patent the invention, but some hacker guy steals your idea. This is not something a printed source can help you with, we must use the internet logs to prove such a case.
- Statuatory Violations - You have a stalker over the internet who you used to be cool with back in the days, but he now has your address. You want to make a harassment claim so do you resort to printed sources to make your case? I think not.
- Ethical Violations - Your son just bumped into a site that is supposed to be for educational purposes but instead is filled with a bunch of porn. How do you go about arguing this in a court of law? Certainly not from any printed sources.
- Consumer Fraud - Suppose you are buying something from E-bay, amazon, or any web related outlet and they rip you off. Again, there's no amount of printed sources that can save you in this siutation.
In addition, let's not forget some important laws passed as a result of rising internet misuse such as the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act and the No Electronic Theft Act. Those are just some examples of where printed sources cannot help you in these situations.
Sources:
http://www.isoc.org/internet/
http://www.stuart.iit.edu/courses/E...sofInternet.htm
http://users.etown.edu/s/selchewa/h...net_sources.pdf
http://www.lawguru.com/ilawlib/index.html |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| actually you've just came out, and made your own little point. |
|
|
| stevieboy32808 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lepanto
actually you've just came out, and made your own little point. |
It's baseless responses like these which drag the PDD section down the ter. |
|
|
| Lepanto |
| quote: | Originally posted by stevieboy32808
It's baseless responses like these which drag the PDD section down the ter. |
how is it baseless? you're telling ME what i was tryign to say. and then you just proceed to make your own point. so, enjoy. |
|
|
| priveye03 |
Let me put it in perspective.
You said:
| quote: | | bring a website into court or bring a printed signed document into court and see which one holds up |
he said:
| quote: | | I guess the next big question on your mind is can those sources be used in a court of law? The short answer is yes if it is considered evidence to the case or if it is a direct interpretation of a law. |
You said:
| quote: | | Information on the Internet may misrepresent the truth, be out of date, biased or just incorrect. |
He said:
| quote: | | There are also websites run by reference e-librarians that keep track of legitimate and valid content online to prevent any of the bias or journalistic errors you were talking about. |
| quote: | | It's just a matter of knowing where to look to find those legitamite sources that poses the problem. |
Aside from going into every little rebuttle, he refutted your point. k? k. |
|
|
|
|
