Blog Party!

About 180 million Americans have access to the internet (Greer 11). Eastin, Yang and Nathanson report that a study done by the Pew Research Center found that “44% of Internet users have created content for the Internet, and only a small portion of them update their content on a regular basis” (211). These statistics are frightening because millions of us are relying on internet sources for factual, accurate information however, much of the information we find online is created by people lacking proper credentials or adequate knowledge.

My inquiry question therefore is how do we know what we read online is credible and is online information affecting our perception of fact/truth? Since the internet and online searching is only growing in popularity, my conclusion is that the public needs to understand the factors affecting their perceptions of credibility, the process in which information is accepted as fact and the importance of ethical coverage of information in the media.

1. Many factors affect people’s perceptions of internet credibility. One study found that when researching health information in particular, users relied on source expertise and knowledge of content when assessing credibility (Eastin). A problem associated with credibility on the internet is that the internet itself is structured internally. Burbules writes that “when we do try to judge the credibility of an information source, we frequently must rely on other information gleaned within the network” (443). In other words, in order to determine whether a source is reliable, oftentimes we search on the internet itself for that information which leads us to the question whether or not that secondary site is credible. Site sponsor, contact information, currency of information, customer service response time, and site structure are also influential factors in people’s perceptions of site credibility. These sources report similar information. Whatever the factor may be, the information presented is not the only thing people are basing credibility on. People need to be aware of the tactics that websites can employ to distract from the quality of their information so that they will be less likely to fall victim to false reporting.

I conducted two interviews to get an understanding of what the public sees as factors affecting credibility online. The first interview, conducted with a college student, returned the following information: She explained that “for many websites, there is no lengthy publication process to guarantee credibility and while the act of internet research may seem like a convenience as it is so easily accessible, it is this accessibility that requires an almost more difficult and certainly more critical reading to guarantee credibility” (Nash) The second interview, done with an employee in a school district who works as a media technician in a school library. She said “too much is being taken at face value as truth simply because it's on the Internet. We are just so inundated with information that it becomes difficult to sort fact from fiction” (DeLand). She also went on to explain that it is good that people question the information they read, however, with all of the unreliable information out there, we are forced to question too much and can stall a person out.

2. So, after a person has located information online and has taken the factors listed above into consideration, just how exactly does information become fact? Peer review is a term that means people with credentials and knowledge have reviewed the information and deemed it credible. This is a fairly reliable means of sorting through “good” information from the rest of it. Bruckman explains that students and other users of internet information need to understand the theories of what makes something “true.” She explains that truth is socially constructed and “social acceptance is what makes something a fact” (Bruckman 36). She goes on to say that “an idea is not much of a fact if only one lonely person believes it” (36). The notion that everything we consider to be a fact came about my means of a social process is a little disconcerting. However, until the information is widespread enough that it is accepted by a large group of people, it probably would never have been known at all, as Bruckman suggests. What is important to recognize though, is who is accepting the information as a fact and what their credentials to do so are. This will help weed through the millions of opinion polls to the knowledgeable, credentialed people who are likely to be accurate in their information.

3. The nature of the media right now is that each network, each site and each reporter wants to be the first with the latest information. This hurried style of reporting reduces the importance of checking your facts in order to get the story out as soon as possible. Unfortunately this doesn’t always lead to an ethical, reliable and accurate form of reporting. A good example of unethical media coverage lies in the short story “Harrison Bergeron” by Kurt Vonnegut, Jr. The story depicts a society of people whose qualities and individual characteristics are being controlled through various means to make everyone exactly equal. Intelligence, strength, skill, etc. are reduced to an equal level among all members of the society. The story is about a husband and wife whose son is exceptionally talented and imprisoned for his resistance to controlling his abilities. The husband and wife watch his escape and eventual death on television. The media has an obligation to get information out to the people, however, where should the line be drawn? Does personal privacy get thrown out the window in the interest of sharing information? Is information being catered to certain population groups instead of a comprehensive approach?


I would like to further discuss the following questions: Can the American public continue to rely on internet sources as a credible and reliable medium for facts? If so, how can the public be educated on credibility so that fewer people are misinformed or swayed by biased and incorrect information?



Works Cited

Bruckman, Amy S. "Student Research and the Internet." Communications of the ACM 48.12 (2005): 35-38. Web. 15 Nov 2009.

Burbules, Nicholas C. "Paradoxes of the Web: The Ethical Dimensions of Credibility." Library Trends 49.3 (2001): 441-53. Web. 15 Nov 2009.

DeLand, Diana. Personal Interview. November 10, 2009.

Eastin, Matthew S. "Credibility Assessments of Online Health Information: The Effects of Source Expertise and Knowledge of Content ." Journal of Computer Mediated Communication 6.4 (2001): n. pag. Web. 15 Nov 2009.

Eastin, Matthew S., Mong-Shan Yang, and Amy I. Nathanson. "Children of the Net: An Empirical Exploration Into the Evaluation of Internet Content." Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media 50.2 (2006): 211-30. Web. 15 Nov 2009.

Greer, Jennifer D. "Evaluation the Credibility of Online Information: A Test of Source and Advertising Influence." Mass Communication & Society 6.1 (2003): 11-28. Web. 15 Nov 2009.

Nash, Monica. Personal Interview. November 9, 2009.

Vonnegut, Kurt Jr. “Harrison Bergeron.” Literature: An Introduction to Fiction, Poetry, Drama, and Writing. Eds. X. J. Kennedy and Dana Gioia. New York: Pearson-Longman, 2007. 198-202.