The most obvious example of a nonfiction site that may or may not be credible is Wikipedia. I've always questioned the accuracy of the information on the site since anyone with access to the Internet can write about any topic and modify an article as they see fit. It's especially disconcerting when reference sources are lacking. (I'm glad that Wikipedia notes this by saying that a citation is needed so that I at least know to be a little more skeptical about its reliability.) A similar, and perhaps more reliable, site would be something like Britannica Online. I would say I trust this site more because it's an actual encyclopedia, written by professional writers and thoroughly edited. Or maybe I just trust it more because it's also available in book form, a format that seems a lot more "official."
Another website whose credibility I don't always trust is Yahoo! Answers. Like Wikipedia, anyone can post on the website, but Yahoo! Answers users often don't include citations in the their posts. The only method of review is a user rating of responses. I'll admit that I've turned to this site when I had questions about material from my science classes, and I was usually disappointed with what I found. A lot of the answers were just plain wrong! There doesn't seem to be as much monitoring as there is on Wikipedia. When I want more trustworthy information, I turn to a site affiliated with a school or university, and I trust these sites more because of the authority of the writers.
Good.
ReplyDelete