3-2 Blog: Unrestricted Web Publishing

A grave and disturbing article was published in The New York Times yesterday titled “Utah Garage Cleaning Turns Up Boxes of Suffocated Infants” (2014). This particular article does not have any sources cited as references at the end of the article, however, that does not stop it from having what do seem to be credible sources through-out the article. Much of what is cited are witnesses or experts (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010; Montecino, 1998). The witness are established as being credible because the authors explain how long the witnesses knew the family that lived in the home, and how much they interacted with the family (Dobner & Healy, 2014). Even more credible information is the quotes by one of the experts. The article names a chief of police and quotes him directly (Dobner & Healy, 2014). This created credibility just by the fact that he is a chief of police and thus would seem to have knowledge on this subject (Dobner & Healy, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). Furthering that, a reader can actually check into the fact that he is actually a chief a police, which allows for more credibility (Dobner & Healy, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). Finally, the other expert that is quoted is a doctor. He discusses how this type of crime can be caused because of mental illnesses (Dobner & Healy, 2014). The authors establish credibility for this doctor by explaining what his specialty is in and where he works (Dobner & Healy, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). This gives the audience enough information to feel that they can trust this man’s opinion, and enough information for them to be able to search this and see if this man really does what the authors are claiming (Dobner & Healy, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). Because of all of this, this article and the sources that it uses seems to be credible (Dobner & Healy, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010).

This article appears to be credible, but what about other articles? What would happen if there was unrestricted web publishing? In many ways it seems like there already is this because of the ability for people to post on blogs. Because of that “anyone, in theory, can publish on the Web” (Montecino, 1998). However, what if this was applied to all websites on the Internet? That would be difficult. It can be hard enough to establish what is fact and what is fiction on the Internet now. Virginia Montecino’s article titled “Criteria to Evaluate the Credibility of WWW Resources (1998) is an entire article written just to help people to be able to distinguish between fact and fiction on the Internet. 

There are currently places with more trustworthy information, for example The New York Times, however if there was completely unrestricted web publishing, then it would be almost impossible to establish what is fact and what is fiction (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010; Montecino, 1998). An unrestricted web would cause information that is not fact to spread even further than it can currently, which would cause for an audience of uninformed or misinformed people (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010; Montecino, 1998). Most audience members do not currently look into the sources of the information that they read so with unrestricted web publishing, it would be almost impossible for the correct and factual information to reach an audience or actually spread past that audience (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010; Montecino, 1998).

Reference:

Dobner, J. & Healy, J. (2014, April 14). Utah garage cleaning turns up boxes of suffocated infants. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/15/us/utah-garage-cleaning-turns-up-boxes-of-suffocated-infants.html?hp

Kovach, B. & Rosenstiel, T. (2010). Blur: How to know what’s true in the age of information overload. New York: Bloomsbury, USA.

Montecino, V. (1998, August). Criteria to evaluate the credibility of WWW resources. Education & Technology Resources. Retrieved from http://mason.gmu.edu/~montecin/web-eval-sites.htm

2-3 Blog: Social Media and Truth

When I was younger, I learned through observation. I learned about life and how to do things through watching my family. As I grew, I still learned through observation, but also from my own actions. I started making my own mistakes and learning from them. Finally now I learn mostly through media outlets (Baran, 2014). Television, social media websites, the Internet all give me must of the information that I learn now (Baran, 2014).

Today I woke up, and while looking at my newsfeed on Facebook, I saw someone post a link about the age of the Moon being revealed (Choi, 2014).  Charles Choi’s article titled Moon’s Age Revealed, and a Lunar Mystery May Be Solved (2014) does seem to be true to me. There are a couple of reasons why it seems to be true to me. The first reason is that there is no real reason that I can see why it would be made up (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). It is not a gossip story that would cause controversy, it is not a story that is speculating information that could lead to a major audience wanting to discuss it, it really is not doing much other than stating information (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). So all of that begs the question that if it is not true, why would it really need to be posted because it is not doing anything to specifically gain an audience in any way or cause controversy (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010)? The second reason that I believe it to be true is because the link that my friend on Facebook posted, lead to me to a site that I find to be reliable (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). This article is posted on Yahoo.com, which, for me, has been a consistently reliable source of information, so that also contributes to me believing this.

I definitely think that at times social media sites can be reliable for obtaining credible information. If for no other reason, the odds are definitely against social media sites always posting not credible information. But beside that, people are the ones that are posting on the social media sites, so it is actually up to the people whether they post credible information or not (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). I had to scroll through two other links that my friends on Facebook posted before I found one that I found to be credible. The other ones were scandalous, and for me did not seem to be true. Both of the other posts seemed to be trying to cause controversy, and even admitted to speculating most of the information in the article (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). Because of that, I could not find a way to defend that they were true, so I had to scroll some more until I found one that I could see as being credible.

Because of this, social media sites can be reliable for credible information, if the people that are posting that information are reliable for posting credible information (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). If those people are not, then, in turn, the social media sites are not (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010).

Reference:

Baran, S. J. (2014) Introduction to mass communication: Media literacy and culture. (8th ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Choi, C. Q. (2014, April 2). Moon’s Age Revealed, and a Lunar Mystery May Be Solved. Space.com. Retrieved from http://news.yahoo.com/moons-age-revealed-lunar-mystery-may-solved-172146898.html

Kovach, B. & Rosenstiel, T. (2010). Blur: How to know what’s true in the age of information overload. New York: Bloomsbury, USA.

1-5 Blog: Influence of the Media

There are many forms of new media that I use daily. I use my phone, my computer, the Internet, and Facebook all daily. Because of that, social media has influenced my perspective of events because it has given me the ability to learn things so quickly. Things like Twitter have created a world where I can get information about events the minute that they are occurring, something that never could happen in the past (Baran, 2014). Newspapers used to report information days later, and now information can be posted minutes later (Baran, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010).

Is this a positive thing? I can honestly see both sides of this question. It is a positive thing in the fact that information can be spread so much faster (Baran, 2014; Bauder, 2011; Farhi, 2012). It has created a wider audience for information, which I think is good and important (Baran, 2014; Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). People should be able to be informed of things, and the vast majority of people are now able to get information (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). All of that is a positive influence in how social media has influenced people’s perspective of events.

On the other hand, though, because information can spread so quickly now, it is hard to know what is true and what is not true (Baran, 2014; Weinberger, 2012). Furthermore, because people want to be the first to post new information, sometimes that information can be biased and the audience may not realize or even notice that (Baran, 2014). To me, that is a negative thing. When information was more controlled, although it may have reached a smaller audience, it was reported in a less biased manner and was also correct (Kovach & Rosenstiel, 2010). With all of the competition to be the first one to report information, sometimes what is reported is incorrect, and because of social media, that incorrect information can spread quickly to a wide audience (Baran, 2014; Bauder, 2011; Farhi, 2012). That is a major negative aspect of the influences of social media.

So overall does the positive outweigh the negative? In my opinion it does because people should be able to get information faster. Furthering that, the negative aspects that I mentioned could be fixed. None of those issues are things that have to occur, they are just a result of the need to be the first to announce information, and so they could be corrected (Baran, 2014; Bauder, 2011; Farhi, 2012). Will they be? The answer, unfortunately, is probably not because the competition for being the first to have information is only going to grow, but that does not mean that it cannot happen (Baran, 2014; Bauder, 2011; Farhi, 2012).

Reference:

Baran, S. J. (2014). Introduction to mass communication: Media literacy and culture. (8^th ed.) New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

Bauder, D. (2011, January 9). Media outlets apologize after falsely reporting Giffords’ death. Associated Press. Retrieved from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/10/media-outlets-apologize-a_n_806603.html

Farhi, P. (2012, December 18). Media too quick to fill in the gaps in story of school shooting in Newtown, Conn. The Washington Post. Retrieved from http://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/style/media-too-quick-to-fill-in-the-gaps-in-story-of-school-shooting-in-newtown-conn/2012/12/18/368ae690-4959-11e2-ad54-580638ede391_story.html

Kovach, B. & Rosenstiel, T. (2010). Blur: How to know what’s true in the age of information overload. New York: Bloomsbury, USA.

Weinberger, D. (2012, February 17). The changing nature of knowledge in the Internet age [Interview by B. Gladstone]. Retrieved from http://www.onthemedia.org/story/187775-changing-nature-knowledge-internet-age/transcript/