What is 'Misinformation In The Age Of Information' ?
- Misinformation - Information which is false, misleading and incorrect.
- In The Age Of Information - terms forseen refer to 'New Media' ; primarily focusing on the "Internet".
- Short clip on Internet misinformation : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lUGHWzaA3sA
Background :
Nine or ten years ago, the Internet was essentially an academic tool for research and information. Presently, with the rising spread of false or misleading information on the internet, this could damage its usefulness as an information tool.
If we don't have the ability to understand the web as it's now emerging, we will end up with things that are very bad. Certain umdemocratic things could emerge and misinformation will start spreading over the web.
Unfortunately, the Internet also contains a great deal of infomation that is neither valuable nor reliable. Since anyone can post comments or information on the Internet, users need to develop critical thinking skills to judge the accuracy of online information.
- Do you trust the Internet 100% now? I go for a 50/50.
Misinformation can appear on the Internet in many guises such as:
- Hate sites that spread malicious misinformation. ( Personal over-reaction as influencial. )
- Weird online "informercials". ( Commercial sites with bogus content to for attraction.)
- Sites which promote fake products. (Mis-branding.)
- Personal opinion that is presented as facts.
- Email hoaxes. (eg :http://www.channelnewsasia.com/cna/technology/zafi.htm )
- Ever popular fake personal infomation in social networking sites .
...........and much more.
- Dictionary.com still works for me though. Agree? Or am I too lazy to open up a real-life dictionary. Dictionary.com is a registered website anyway. So far the words I've searched on have 99% similar meanings to the ones in Oxford dictionary.
Misinformation is spotted when the information:
- varies over same findings from different websites.
- unreliable and non-certified sources.
- unrealistic.
- When browsing certain websites, do you ask yourself " Does this information on the website make sense? " Common sense is sometimes the best indicator of quality or lack there of.
Why do misinformation happen?
- Unintensionally- Accidental. Yes, we understand. Not everything is perfect.
- Intensionally- That hidden objective which is hard to distinguish.
- It's like '2nd life'. Desires evoke. Fantasies provoke. Reality awoke.
Children and young teens at high-risk :
- Children may have a hard time distinguishing between good and bad infomation on websites. They tend to lookout word for word which only they understand. Care less.
- Young teens seems to be confused at most time . Influencial victims.
- Maybe the education governing body should start working on an extra subject concerning the guidance to safe use of the Internet. Should implement this as early as the primary school stages. What do you think?
Never be misinformed. Practice this :
- Check the authority of the site. ( eg: WHOIS database or Whois.net)
- Check the accuracy and the coverage of the site. ( Is information comprehensive ?)
- Check the objective of the site. ( Does website has obvious bias ?)
- Check that the information on the site is current.
- Don't just 'scan' a website. Start evaluating too :
- Evaluating internet infomation : http://www.library.jhu.edu/researchhelp/general/evaluating/
- Techniques to apply on questions to ask : http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/TeachingLib/Guides/Internet/Evaluate.html
- Sensing information counterfeits : http://www.library.jhu.edu/researchhelp/general/evaluating/counterfeit.html
* video link on "methods to evaluating a website" : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnrL8wQQIoE&feature=related
- Should start off working on a software which sniff fake information too. Agree ?. I know its not easy. But this creator could be rich than Bill Gates.
Some cases of misinformation years back :
1. Wikipedia misinformation :
(a) Misinformation of John Seigenthaler (political figure) occured in Wikipedia : http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/articleshow/1318115.cms
(b) Presently, that misinformation statement had been cleared : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Seigenthaler,_Sr.
(c) How authorative is Wikipedia? : http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/news/124/1028124/court-rules-wikipedia
2. Apparently most sites jokes about President Obama fluffed during oath-taking but not this : http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/northamerica/usa/barackobama/4307886/Barack-Obama-should-retake-fluffed-oath.html
3. Former trader gets jail for posting false info online (a Singapore case) : http://www.asiaone.com/Business/News/My+Money/Story/A1Story20080318-55054.html
4. Online scam in Singapore : http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/324257/1/.html
5. Review of false information on social networking sites : http://www.realwire.com/release_detail.asp?ReleaseID=6671
My point of view :
The web has transformed the way many people work, play and do business. I feared that, if the way the internet is used is left to develop unchecked, "bad things" could happen. Certain undemocratic things could emerge and even much more misinformation will start spreading over the web. Most importantly, everyone is responsible for the way we access the information and its reliability. We need to be aware of Internet outcomes.
Have you encounter any misinformation from our local authorised websites (.sg) ? So far i have not.
A useful reminder that we still need to keep our thinking caps on when online. And you make a good point about the need to evaluate blogs, just as you do other websites. In fact, there's need to be even more careful with blogs!
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned that 'If we don't have the ability to understand the web as it's now emerging, we will end up with things that are very bad. Certain umdemocratic things could emerge and misinformation will start spreading over the web' - what do you mean by 'undemocratic' and 'bad' things?
You have many links to useful materials - the challenge is to organise them and integrate them more seamlessly and coherently into your discussion.
ReplyDeleteIn answer to your question, I feel that educating children in primary schools about misinformation can actually work in both ways.
ReplyDeletePositively speaking, children are more receptive to new concepts and are able to accept them more quickly. Once kids grow up, they would have ideas of their own and by then it would be too late because they would start building their own psychological barrier.
Negatively speaking, children are too quickly exposed to the new media, and it sometimes deprives them of a chance to interact with the real world. Now as we are discussing this, primary schools are eagerly trying to integrate new media into their curriculum. Despite the fact that the world is growing fast, but i feel that this pace of progression is disadvantageous to the health of children.
Hence, evaluating them all, I feel that they should implement it in early stages of life, but primary school stage would be too early. I would suggest early secondary-school-days. What do you think? =)
Actually i think that having misinformation is very common nowadays over the net, because some of the information that i tried to find requires me to have at least some basic knowledge before i can actually confirm that the rest of the information is geniune.
ReplyDeleteso far so i got most of my information from the internet rather than books. So i think that you just have to surf more than 3 to 4 webpages to get the information right and understandable.
ReplyDeleteThe internet is a good source for getting information but books are still better as all the information you need is in it. Of course, that is if you picked the right book.
ReplyDeleteI have not encountered any misinformation from local authorised websites yet.
from my own opinion, i rather learning from internet than reading books. everytime, when i holding a book , i feel like to sleep; however, when i am facing the computer, i feel refreshed. Evenif the resources from internet is not totally correct, i prefer using internet
ReplyDeletewith new media now accessible to almost everyone nowadays, it is possible for everyone and anyone to edit the pages, like wikipedia, which allows anyone who has an account to edit the page. i agree wih wanzihao, that learning from books is better than learning from learning from the internet, as books are more credible than some random guy posting on the internet.
ReplyDeletelearning on the internet is not a bad thing but beware of false and misleading information.
ReplyDeleteInformation on the internet can be a very useful tool. I feel that it is best to research more on the internet before coming to a conclusion. This way, you get to see things at a different view.
ReplyDeleteI feel that we have to check the credibilty of the site before we begin to accept its information. There are numerous websites out there and some could be biased, thus affecting the accuracy of the content.
ReplyDeleteI also feel that with the rapid speed of progress in technology, more and more new things surface every day, thus contents on sites could easiy be outdated. Therefore, we have to check the date of publish in addition to the factors stated by Ridhuan
Wei Xi
ReplyDeleteI agree with your points on how to not be misinformed. I feel that there is a need for all of us to practice this. Like Syahir said, the rapid speed of progress in the world can only make the factual information on the site less credible day by day. Thus we have to practice these few steps so that informations are not misleadding or inaccurate or even outdated.
I wouldn't mind the misinformation if it's coming from non-academic site as I don't expect much from such sites. Unless I'm searching for legitimate and academic-related topics, I would be very annoyed by the fact that there is so much of unrelated and unreliable sources on the internet.
ReplyDeleteThis is a rather interesting topic to post about. Your post is quite informative.
Searching informations from books is better than internet but you will need to sacrifice time.
ReplyDeleteFor me i prefer find info on the net rather than books as it is much faster but sometimes the info that we received are irrelevant and false.
Due to web 2.0, people can upload any thing online like info, video, etc.. Sometime it is very hard to judge the information they give is accurate or not. The information can be true or false. It is better to search for more than 1 resources or other way like book to confirm.
ReplyDeleteThis is so true! Anyone can write what they want on the Net, so I think we should always take things on the Net with a pinch of salt. Sites like Wikipedia can be edited by anyone, so we should always doubel check the information.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, 'undemocratic' refers to all users should not have thoughts of any bias judgements and different perceptions which are based entirely on the web. 'Bad Things' basically refers to the exploitation of different users that have a hidden agenda when they access to the new media.
ReplyDeleteImplementing the new media to secondary schools is not a bad idea. However,it should not be cater to the secondary school only as i have faith in the education system. The system will 'mould' our young children to be a 'responsible' and 'creative young users'.We ought to bear in mind our technology is progressing rapidly even though new media is not taught in schools at early age, parents would search for alternatives to cater their kids with the greatest necessities to cope and compete with other children. Thus,age is not a limitation but the user's attitudes towards through parental guidance.
I guess its still best to be a 'bookWORM' rather that being 'WORMED'. Authorised clearly stated for reference.