Evaluating a Website or Publication's Authority - Web Literacy for Student Fact-Checkers - 25 views
webliteracy.pressbooks.com/...te-or-publications-reliability
website_reliability information_literacy
shared by mrshathaway on 15 Aug 18
- No Cached
-
most of us would like to ascribe authority to sites and authors who support our conclusions and deny authority to publications that disagree with our worldview
-
Wikipedia’s guidelines for determining the reliability of publications. These guidelines were developed to help people with diametrically opposed positions argue in rational ways about the reliability of sources using common criteria.
-
defined by process, aim, and expertise.
- ...11 more annotations...
-
fact-checkers of all political stripes are happy to be able to track a fact down to one of these publications since they have reputations for a high degree of accuracy, and issue corrections when they get facts wrong.
-
a reliable source for facts should have a process in place for encouraging accuracy, verifying facts, and correcting mistakes
-
Process
-
researchers and certain classes of professionals have expertise, and their usefulness is defined by that expertise
-
Expertise
-
while we often think researchers are more knowledgeable than professionals, this is not always the case
-
Reporters, on the other hand, often have no domain expertise
-
Aim
-
Aim is defined by what the publication, author, or media source is attempting to accomplish
-
One way to think about aim is to ask what incentives an article or author has to get things right
-
In general, you want to choose a publication that has strong incentives to get things right, as shown by both authorial intent and business model, reputational incentives, and history
