Meryl's Notes Blog
Things wordy, geeky, and webbyKlatsch: What Online Information Can You Trust?
Monday, March 29th, 2010 at 10:07 AM |
- Image by Omar_MK via Flickr
In looking for data to use in a story, I came across what sounded like valid data. But it wasn’t enough. The article didn’t say where the data came from. So I searched hard to see if I could find a study or some valid resource to backup the data that I wanted to use. I found zero. This experience compelled me to better remember to “trust, but verify.”
I don’t instantly trust Wikipedia articles because the public can edit them. While I’m sure many Wikipedia editors work hard to ensure its accuracy, it’s a massive site that receives many daily updates. I added an entry for a company making an effort to stick to facts with no promotion. In fact, I used a few other Wikipedia pages as examples. Wikipedia editors deleted the article and all references to the company. I posted several messages in the Wikipedia talk pages to no avail. It’s a harsh reminder that humans are behind the free encyclopedia. And our thoughts and emotions don’t always follow logic.
Leslie A Joy points to a great article on How to Find the Best Resources from The Renegade Writer.
klatsch n. “A casual social gathering, usually for conversation.” Source: The Free Dictionary
So how do you know what online information you can trust?
Search and archives
Get Updates
-
Categories
Archives
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
-
Other Stops
-
Connect with Meryl
-
Recommended
Sponsors
Blogroll
All Content © Copyright 1995 - 2012 Meryl.net. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.
Privacy Policy | Thanks to Blue Flavor and Fireside Media | Valid XHTML and CSS
6 comments
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Tin Hang Liu and Meryl Evans, Face to Facebook. Face to Facebook said: RT @merylkevans Klatsch: What Online Information Can You Trust? http://bit.ly/ayY8Hi #SMM [...]
Meryl,
Thanks for the reminder about not assuming that the information on Wikipedia is correct. I use it a lot and I shouldn’t make that assumption because I know better.
As a rule of thumb, the most credible sources of information are commercial online databases such as Lexis/Nexis and so on. Information coming out of universities, government and often industry watchdogs are often good bets as well.
Avil
.-= Avil Beckford’s blog …How to Read to Solve a Problem =-.
Hi Meryl
Guess it’s one of the problems of the web.. so much info and so much rubbish!
I use the net to find most of my info when I’m writing speeches, quotes, jokes, stories, and most of the info is pretty good.
Much easier than buying books or going down to the local library.
Looks like a case of swings and roudabouts.
.-= Keith Davis’s blog …A helping hand… =-.
@Avil, excellent rule of thumb. Thanks for the reminder.
@Keith, indeed. One good thing about social media… connects us with others who may be a primary source or point to a trusted one.
Meryl, I have to say that I am so not a fan of wikis. In fact, the term grates on my nerves for some reason. Have you ever tried to build a page on wikipedia? Cumbersome does not even begin to describe it.
When researching, I search and then try and verify facts through two or more sites. Of course they need to be sites other than TMZ or Icanhazcheeseburger or anything like that.
George
.-= George Angus’s blog …What’s Your Writing Background? =-.
@George, I’ve used my share of wikis (different brands) and they’re not too user-friendly, you’re right. I agree with your process — verify data on at least two sites. Icanhazcheeseburger may not be the place for facts, but it’s the place for laughs
Post a comment (or leave a trackback)