Comment on Reference New Approaches to Credibility Tools - 1 views

• 
  #1 Felipe Urdaneta on 30 Mar 12

   

  This is by far the best of the articles I have read from this series. It is great because it is objective and it does not have a visceral prejudicial approach to technology and digital media, where by definition or better as it seems to me from what I have read so far is the fact that the internet is bad, however if things are printed in a book, they are not only good but true. I disagree with this stance. I also think that it is the one that touches directly on the quality of education from digital media and not just with issues of sexuality and content in the web.
  Salient points:
  1-Transition to digital information , storage, analysis, and distribution has happened in an astoundingly short period of time and now it seems everything is in digital format and if not pretty soon iyt will be.
  2-Quality of online content and self-support options can have direct impact on the learning process.
  3-The author's have a problem with search engines and the way the information and hits are presented. "Popularity equals credibility" and this might not always be the case and there maybe bias and conflicts of interests in the process. That is bad of course but considering that for example Google has 34,000 searches per second (2 million per minute; 121 million per hour; 3 billion per day; 88 billion per month) I guess humans now accepted and believes in this search engine quite a lot. Are we all that studied then?
  4-The other issue that always comes up is the credibility of Wikipedia. But just to put things in perspective Encyclopedia Britannica threw the towel to its existence because simply it could not compete with that giant monster that is digital media.
  5-And how about blogs? In 2010 there were approximately 450 million active english language blogs. I ask again are we the majority of people that read or have blogs the "bad" majority? I am not saying that all blogs are good or credible by any means, but neither are newspapers or networks for that matters. I see news media being biased every day and this being the central point of controversy and discussions.
  6-Builders of digital networks and information services are now more open and by creating more opportunity for user participation in content creation and dissemination. I think this very cool not bad at all.
  7-The open source approach states that to be secure, software must first be transparent and then tested by users. I am and have been beta tester of several programs and think this is very important.
  Bottom line is that information from all sources needs to be taken with caution. The issue with digital technology is the fact that I can see why there can potential pitfalls with bad information but that is when one has to be a smart user and be skeptical even of one's shadow.
  
  F. Urdaneta

   

  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">This is by far the best of the articles I have read from this series. It is great because it is objective and it does not have a visceral prejudicial approach to technology and digital media, where by definition or better as it seems to me from what I have read so far is the fact that the internet is bad, however if things are printed in a book, they are not only good but true. I disagree with this stance. I also think that it is the one that touches directly on the quality of education from digital media and not just with issues of sexuality and content in the web. <br /> Salient points: <br /> 1-Transition to digital information , storage, analysis, and distribution has happened in an astoundingly short period of time and now it seems everything is in digital format and if not pretty soon iyt will be. <br /> 2-Quality of online content and self-support options can have direct impact on the learning process. <br /> 3-The author's have a problem with search engines and the way the information and hits are presented. "Popularity equals credibility" and this might not always be the case and there maybe bias and conflicts of interests in the process. That is bad of course but considering that for example Google has 34,000 searches per second (2 million per minute; 121 million per hour; 3 billion per day; 88 billion per month) I guess humans now accepted and believes in this search engine quite a lot. Are we all that studied then? <br /> 4-The other issue that always comes up is the credibility of Wikipedia. But just to put things in perspective Encyclopedia Britannica threw the towel to its existence because simply it could not compete with that giant monster that is digital media. <br /> 5-And how about blogs? In 2010 there were approximately 450 million active english language blogs. I ask again are we the majority of people that read or have blogs the "bad" majority? I am not saying that all blogs are good or credible by any means, but neither are newspapers or networks for that matters. I see news media being biased every day and this being the central point of controversy and discussions. <br /> 6-Builders of digital networks and information services are now more open and by creating more opportunity for user participation in content creation and dissemination. I think this very cool not bad at all. <br /> 7-The open source approach states that to be secure, software must first be transparent and then tested by users. I am and have been beta tester of several programs and think this is very important. <br /> Bottom line is that information from all sources needs to be taken with caution. The issue with digital technology is the fact that I can see why there can potential pitfalls with bad information but that is when one has to be a smart user and be skeptical even of one's shadow. <br /> <br /> F. Urdaneta</div>

  ...

  Cancel

To Top