# <span style="color:#ad5cad; font-family: 'Georgia'; font-size: .9em;">Web Search & Evaluation</span>

## <span style="color:#7F44B0; font-family: 'Georgia'; font-size: .75em;">[“Truth, Truthiness, Triangulation: A News Literacy Toolkit for a “Post-truth” World”](https://blogs.slj.com/neverendingsearch/2016/11/26/truth-truthiness-triangulation-and-the-librarian-way-a-news-literacy-toolkit-for-a-post-truth-world/)/[“Evaluating Internet Sources”](https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/evaluating-resources)</span>

### <span style="font-family: 'Georgia'; font-size: .8em;">Word Count: 926</span>

### <span style="font-family: 'Georgia'; font-size: .8em;">Google Search</span>

1. What would you query to see how many pages on the English Wikipedia site contain the exact phrase “Northeastern University”? How many results did you get?
a. Once I opened up the English Wikipedia site, I put in Northeastern University into the search tab. I got 32,043 results. I wanted to try doing an advanced search on Google as well, putting in the required information I wanted, like the exact phrasing of "Northeastern University" as well as the Wikipedia site. This got me much fewer results, with only 5,370 results.
2. What would you query to see web pages about the skate fish without mention of the phrase “ice rink”? (Hint: It can still mention “ice” or “rink” but not “ice rink.”)
a. To get these results, I put skate fish in quotations because I wanted to be sure that only posts with that exact phrasing came up. I also put quotations around ice rink, because if the quotations are taken out, the search would only exclude the word "ice" and not "rink." This specific search allows for ice and rink to be found in the searches, but not "ice rink."
3. What would you query to see web pages about the Northeastern Huskies from the first day of 2001 through the last day of 2002?
a. To find this, I put "Northeastern huskies" in quotations, so that the results would exclude anything about the university, or the dog breed. I then went to "Tools" and put in the exact timeframe of January 1, 2001 to December 31, 2002.

### <span style="font-family: 'Georgia'; font-size: .8em;">Web Credibility</span>

1. Find a web page of questionable credibility and apply some of the criteria discussed by Valenza and Berkley Library.
A good example of this is *The Onion,* an online media organization that produces satirical news articles, videos, infographics, etc. I think they're a perfect example of the "post-truth" world. They rely on their articles to go viral and gain attention because of the way they cleverly combine silly, engaging titles with news that is comedically analyzes real-world issues.

For example, [this article](https://www.theonion.com/amazon-worker-emerges-from-holiday-overtime-shift-to-fi-1845852867) titled "Amazon Worker Emerges From Holiday Overtime Shift To Find 3,000 Years Have Passed In Outside World" tells the story of an Amazon worker who, after clocking out of his very long overtime shift, finds himself in the future. Although obviously fake, *The Onion* comments on a multitude of things in this short fake news article with its obvious jabs at Amazon's treatment of its workers inside the workplace, as well as how their power and wealth helps them get out of messy, public complaints online from these disgruntled workers.

In regard to its *purpose* and its *publication and format* (discussed in the Berkeley library article), *The Onion* tends to be politically on the left. Interestingly, it presents itself with a clean interface that looks remarkably like other news sources. I think this is to help its virality, so that although it personifies itself as a reliable news source, it comedically plays with your perception of online news. With its quick humor and relevant content, it aims for a young generation, which we might say would be digital natives, those who have had the internet since its conception and use it the most frequently. It might be controversial to call its educational, but it is definitely trying to persuade the reader to believe something. For instance, in the satirical article above, at its surface, the reader is to be convinced that Amazon is a greedy company only interested in its sustainability and not the health of its workers. Deeper down, the article is attempting to get the reader to be more cautious of any Amazon related companies, or perhaps all companies in general, especially in such a capitalistic America. Because *The Onion* aims for a younger audience, and consistently links their articles to social media, it is easy for them to go viral, and this makes them a widely popular source for satirical news.
### <span style="font-family: 'Georgia'; font-size: .8em;">Wikipedia Evaluation</span>
1. A version of the “Joseph Reagle” Wikipedia article stated (a) I worked at the World Wide Web Consortium and (b) my book *Good Faith Collaboration* was “bestselling.” How do these claims relate to the policy of Wikipedia:Verifiability? Would you suggest any changes to the page?
a. I think that the citation for Reagle working at W3C is good, as it is clearly authored by Reagle himself. There seems to be no clear citation for *Good Faith Collaboration* being a bestseller. Although the embedded link for the book itself is a satisfactory inline citation as per Wikipedia's terms, when the reader clicks on that link, there is no mention of the book being bestselling. Therefore, I would add something a bit stronger as a citation since the *Good Faith Collaboration*'s Wikipedia article lacks the information necessary.
2. According to its history, when was this page first created (i.e., the oldest version)?
a. Going through the history of the Wikipedia article, it seems like this page was first created on August 1, 2011, as seen below.
However, the earliest version of this page simply seems to redirect the viewer to Reagle's book *Good Faith Collaboration*.
The next version of this page was created on June 30, 2012, and has much more information, although it is sparser than the latest updated version.