Quality of information.... and disinformation online
?
An INLS 310.74 project by Bob Stepno and Bob Henshaw
(This version posted 11/14/95 and moved to this address May 4,1998. Sorry, but this is a "cobweb" that hasn't been updated to remove outdated links, etc. But the code does disable some 1995 Java applets that don't work with 1998 browsers; and a copy of that gif file of "MrYuk" must be around here somewhere. The fact that some of the links also are out of date raises a "quality of information" issue in itself, as does the fact that the original Web server that housed this page, blake.oit.unc.edu, has been offline for some months. Bob S, May 1998.)
Who's Defining Quality?
Not us. This area is as subjective as it comes. Two people named Bob might even disagree over a simple statement like, "One person's information is another person's disinformation. One person's 'quality newscast' may be another's 'quality entertainment.'" For some, printing and binding may be a required mark of quality information.Two books, Neil Postman's Amusing Ourselves to Death, and Bill McKibben's The Age of Missing Information argue that our entertainment-oriented culture, especially television, has reduced the content of much of our public discourse to dangerous nonsense...
Print is now merely a residual epistemology, and it will remain so, aided to some extent by the computer, and newspapers and magazines that are made to look like television screens.... (Postman, p.28)Postman's point is that the "this just in" form of late-20th century media deprives information of context and renders much of it meaningless. Can the World Wide Web restore context through linkage, history, depth and debate? That's too philosphical and open-ended a question for a brief class discussion. We might as well ask, "what is truth?"
Instead, we will focus on "quality" as the more practical matter of seeking out information which we can rely on as being (by some definition) factual, accurate or objective....
You, the Consumer...
....have a number issues to consider in your quest for reliable information.Consider Your Needs
Strategies for locating information are determined initially by the nature of our information needs. How much detail is needed? How esoteric is the subject matter?In this marketing and special-interest-oriented culture, media are increasingly aimed at "niche markets." On a medium like the Internet which allows almost anyone to publish, the number of niches increases exponentially. You are your own niche.
There is also the problem of information we do not need. We ignore most of the information we do not need, but it is increasingly difficult to filter. Do we have more control over our exposure to irrelevant information on the Internet than on broadcast media like radio and television? How will Java and other dynamic languages change this equation?
Consider Your Options
If you live on a mountaintop and your satellite dish is down you may feel starved for information and actually go to the library for a book. For most of us, however, too much information is the problem. And the Internet exacerbates this information overload by adding almost unlimited quantity to the problem of weighing the relative quality of the information.Consider Your Time
Convenience is an American tradition, and part of our day-to-day decisions about information. That's why we have authors, publishers, editors, librarians and other "gatekeepers" of information. They collect, process and disseminate information so that we don't have to spend as much time looking. Home-delivered newspapers, radio and television are convenient. Information providers like Crayon help maximize convenience of access to online information sources.
Consider the Source....
With traditional media, we can draw significant conclusions about content from the source alone. Information providers tend to be most successful when consumers can consistently predict certain characteristics about the content.Assuming their content is in demand, providers may become "brand names" for information consumers who welcome the convenience of a reliable, consistent source of information.
Internet search engines, hypertext links and directory services complicate this process. You may be led to the content of a Web page first. You can consider the source if you have reason to question its accuracy or are interested enough to seek further information.
Some existing media "household words" or "brand names" are establishing themselves on the Web, and some Internet start-ups and upstarts are trying to brand themselves as reliable, authoritative and well-known sources, Yahoo being a current favorite of the news media and advertisers. Does the combination of commercial advertising's (literal) brand names lend credibility to an information source? On the other hand, your personal experience browsing a net entity like Sunsite may add to the reputation of the commercial sponsor.
But what other signs of authority might we use to evaluate (or establish) the reliability of a Web resource? Some of these are borrowed from other media, for better or for worse:
- presentation of information (page layout, graphics, etc.)
- the publisher's name, address or URL domain name
- author information: resume,
references, previous publications, professional rank
- documented sources
- style of writing
- outside evaluations -- reviews or references from other sources
In a bookstore, similar considerations influence our decision to buy. But trying to evaluate the legitimacy of information providers on the Internet can be frustrating. Are we more susceptible to disinformation on the Internet for this reason? Is anyone surprised that many online users are looking to the same brand names they have counted on for information in traditional media?
When Rupert Murdoch's
Delphi/NewsCorp/Fox online
service
tweaked TimeWarner for an online error by "the world's
largest media company" it didn't mention that Murdoch isn't
exactly an old guy selling pamphlets on the corner. Do you feel
any
differently when the same online screwup is reported by an
anonymous bunch of web-gazers called SUCK? Do they
raise any different issues?
Does their history as providers of "news" information give them a
higher
sense of quality than other web information sources? Does it help
that
the people involved may have been trained at journalism schools,
brow-beaten by crusty old editors, and may even have read a code
of
ethics? Professional newspaper
photographers are even concerned about
the quality of information provided by digitally manipulated
photographs,
whether online or off, whether intended to inform, disinform, or
"be artistic."
On the other hand, Jon Katz suggests that the old models of
authority and "quality" might not work in the new media.
Do a big budget and enormous sources of information assure
"quality"? Do
giant corporations have hidden agendas online? Here's the Cyberporn debate for
consideration. (The print edition
of Time
also
has suffered from "quality" issues related to new technology.)
The Web also allows "niche" publications to reach a wide
audience.... does their presence on the Web say anything about
the quality ("up-to-date," "with-it," "cool") of their print
editions?
The Web is also a venue for criticism of Web publications, see Suck.com for today's episode of
Netscape-enhanced attitude. Does the "bad boy" style add to or
detract from the message? Is a full-color photo the best way to
comment on the use of the Web as a commercial medium for the sale
of a penis-enlargement
pump? Does anonymity detract from this review of the Web entitled
TV for the Blind
by an employee of a company that hired marketing "experts" to put
it online?
Conspiracy theorists, political minorities (and majorities),
artists,
scientists, the sleepy, drunk, bored, inspired.... anyone can
contribute
to a Usenet
discussion
and can probably find access to a Web server
somewhere, or build
their
own.
Usenet and listserv discussions
also provide a strong forum for evaluation of the quality of web
sites, despite the
uneven quality of the Usenet discourse itself.
50
Greatest Conspiracies online
The Risks
Digest -- Forum on Risks to the Public in
Computers and Related Systems
The
Psychology of Dreamland -- How Secrecy is Destroying Public
Faith in Government and Science
Electric Communities
Links! on the
Cyberporn Debate as disinformation and the response of a Net
community.
Homeopathy:
A Position Statement by the National Council Against Health
Fraud
Alien Identities: Transhuman Contact in Vedic Civilization
and
The Skeptic's Dictionary
Are brand-names an indicator of quality information?
Try reading the articles in this exercise. Does
it help, or further
confuse you? Questions: Brand-name information is
one strategy for minimizing
information overload. But is the real "quality" of information on
the Web your opportunity to break free of the "trustworthy" brand
names of media moguls with hidden agendas and big bank accounts?
The traditional news media hope that their reputation for
professional (fair? unbiased? objective? well-researched? timely?
familiar?) reporting of information will bring acceptance in the
new online media, and that they'll continue to find a way to make
a buck. By providing quality information? Or by pandering to the
lowest common denominator of infotainment-seekers?
Hidden
agendas exist in other media and can be exposed on the Web.
But then you have to consider the source of the expose' too...
Is all of this access to information and the ability to publish
a guarantee of quality, or a guarantee of Babel?
More Questions
Here are some discussion questions of the quality of information
and of web pages, both in terms of the aesthetics and the
content:
"With the use of advanced digital
technology, the
images we are expected to aspire to have become literally too
perfected to be true."
Who do you trust?
Familiar and unfamiliar faces:
People
Here are a few net personalities. How do their home pages
try to establish them as purveyors of "quality" information?
Newspapers
Magazines
TV, radio, and mixed media orgs
To the extent that these are even bigger brand names than
their
print counterparts, will their mastery of designing and
presenting
information on the small screen transfer a sense of "quality" to
the
computer screen? Does a broadcaster (or wire service's) sense of
"deadline every minute" time lend itself to cybercasting, even
when it primarily provides text?
Born on the Web
The accessibility of the Internet as a publishing medium has
given rise to scores of new online information products and
providers. How do those providers who do not enjoy brand name
status legitimize themselves within the chaos of the Internet?
Does good content and a listing in Yahoo guarantee you a following on
the Web? How do online providers go about establishing
consumers' trust? Do the menu listings of Netscape or Spry
Mosaic, or the compilations of "cool site," "hot site" and other
rating systems convince you of quality?Convergence of old and new forms
CompuServe, America Online and Prodigy for years have presented
traditional media information sources as "brand name" partners.
Now NBC has joined
MSN, and MSN has hired a well-respected magazine editor,
Michael Kinsley, who has also been visible on CNN. Will you
trust him because of his CNN connection, or his New Republic
connection, or the Microsoft logo on the page? Does one source or
"quality assurance" cancel out another? In any event, brand names
in print, broadcast and the net seem well on their way to
becoming interchangeable.
Disinformation Issues
The Disinformation Spectrum.....A Fine Line Indeed
Disinformation & Counter measures
What safeguards do various communities take to minimize the risk
of dis-
or misinformation? The academic community uses peer review to help
ensure against false research results.A case study
It may not be a "brand name" source yet, but
Freedom Magazine
has a lot to say about On-line Lies...
In addition to the "Cyberporn" debate and the "Green Card Lawyer"
case discussed earlier in this course, the Internet has been the
scene of publications and counter-publications by followers and
critics of the Church of Scientology, complete with litigation
and action against an anonymous remailing service. The
Scientology organization's use of the web is instructive: it
presents itself as an organization campaigning against misuse of
the Internet. Here are some other links to the Scientology
debate:
Dutch scientology fight
CNN U.S.
News: Church of Scientology protects secrets
F.A.C.T.Net 3 Background
Scientology v. the Internet
Controversies and questions
Finally, here are some samples of serious and less serious web
sites related to the issues of information quality, on and off
the net.
Special thanks to 
for use of their icon and photograph.
This page composed by Bob Stepno and Bob
Henshaw for Paul Jones' Fall 1995 course on Internet Issues and
Applications in the School of Information and Library Science at
the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill