Group items matching

in title, tags, annotations or url

4. CopyrightEven if the copyright notice does not appear prominently, someone wrote, or is responsible for, the creation of a document, graphic, sound or image, and the material falls under the copyright conventions. "Fair use" applies to short, cited excerpts, usually as an example for commentary or research. Materials are in the "public domain" if this is explicitly stated. Internet users, as users of print media, must respect copyright.

5. CitationInternet resources should be cited to identify sources used, both to give credit to the author and to provide the reader with avenues for further research. Standard style manuals (print and online) provide some examples of how to cite Internet documents, although standards have not vet been formally established.

6. ContinuityWill the Internet site be maintained and updated? Is it now and will it continue to be free? Can you rely on this source over time to provide up-to-date information? Some good .edu sites have moved to .com, with possible cost implications. Other sites offer partial use for free, and charge fees for continued or in-depth use

Is your discussion list "moderated"? What does this mean? Does your search engine or index look for all words or are some words excluded? Is this censorship? Does your institution, based on its mission, parent organization or space limitations, apply some restrictions to Internet use? Consider censorship and privacy issues when using the Internet.

If more than one user will need to access a site, consider each user's access and "functionality". How do users connect to the Internet and what kind of connection does the assigned resource require? Does access to the resource require a graphical user interface? If it is a popular (busy) resource, will it be accessible in the time frame needed? Is it accessible by more than one Internet tool? Do users have access to the same Internet tools and applications? Are users familiar with the tools and applications? Is the site "viewable" by all Web browsers?

Does the Internet resource have an identified comparable print or CD ROM data set or source? Does the Internet site contain comparable and complete information? (For example, some newspapers have partial but not full text information on the Internet.) Do you need to compare data or statistics over time? Can you identify sources for comparable earlier or later data? Comparability of data may or may not be important, depending on your project.

What is the context for your research? Can you find "anything" on your topic, that is, commentary, opinion, narrative, statistics and your quest will be satisfied? Are you looking for current or historical information? Definitions? Research studies or articles? How does Internet information fit in the overall information context of your subject? Before you start searching, define the research context and research needs and decide what sources might be best to use to successfully fill information needs without data overload.

At 2:43 a.m., a Twitter user named Greg Hughes (@ghughesca), who was previously tweeting things like, “In 2013, all you need [is] a connection to the Boston police scanner and a Twitter feed to know what’s up. We don’t even need TV anymore,”

Seven minutes later, Kevin Galliford, a journalist for a TV station in Hartford, relayed the same information to his own followers; Galliford’s tweet was retweeted more than 1,000 times in a matter of minutes.

Andrew Kaczynski, a journalist at BuzzFeed, who sent out the police-scanner misinformation to his 81,000 followers

@YourAnonNews, a Twitter news feed connected to the hacker collective Anonymous, tweeted out Tripathi’s name to the hundreds of thousands of people

Roughly 300 Twitter users retweeted Malinowski’s second post on the subject, including the pop-culture blogger Perez Hilton, who sent Sunil Tripathi’s name out to more than six million followers.

Reddit enjoyed record-breaking traffic numbers during the Boston coverage, and the company has always considered itself “content agnostic,” meaning that as long as what’s being posted is legal, Reddit will not intervene and take it down.

@YourAnonNews is very likely to surpass the Twitter following of most major American newspapers. The account is followed by hundreds of journalists, myself included. For those who dream of a post-Snowden utopia where no government and corporate secrets are protected, @YourAnonNews is one of the only trustworthy news sources out there.

2. Become incredulous and indignant.

3. Create rumor mongers.

4. Use a straw man.

Sidetrack opponents with name calling and ridicule.

6. Hit and Run. I

7. Question motives.

8. Invoke authority.

9. Play Dumb.

10. Associate opponent charges with old news.

11. Establish and rely upon fall-back positions.

12. Enigmas have no solution.

13. Alice in Wonderland Logic.

14. Demand complete solutions.

15. Fit the facts to alternate conclusions.

16. Vanishing evidence and witnesses.

17. Change the subject.

18. Emotionalize, Antagonize, and Goad Opponents.

19. Ignore proof presented, demand impossible proofs. This is perhaps a variant of the “play dumb” rule. Regardless of what material may be presented by an opponent in public forums, claim the material irrelevant and demand proof that is impossible for the opponent to come by (it may exist, but not be at his disposal, or it may be something which is known to be safely destroyed or withheld, such as a murder weapon). In order to completely avoid discussing issues may require you to categorically deny and be critical of media or books as valid sources, deny that witnesses are acceptable, or even deny that statements made by government or other authorities have any meaning or relevance.

20. False evidence. Whenever possible, introduce new facts or clues designed and manufactured to conflict with opponent presentations as useful tools to neutralize sensitive issues or impede resolution.

21. Call a Grand Jury, Special Prosecutor, or other empowered investigative body.

22. Manufacture a new truth. Create your own expert(s), group(s), author(s),

leader(s) or influence existing ones willing to forge new ground via scientific, investigative, or social research or testimony which concludes favorably. In this way, if you must actually address issues, you can do so authoritatively.

23. Create bigger distractions.

24. Silence critics.

sh. If you are a key holder of secrets or otherwise overly illuminated and you

think the heat is getting too hot, to avoid the issues, vacate the kitchen.

25. Van