Web search & evaluation

# Web search & evaluation

### Reflection on [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/) by Joyce Valenza and [Evaluating Internet Sources](https://guides.lib.berkeley.edu/evaluating-resources) by Berkeley Library.

In the first article, Valenza speaks on the struggles to be well informed in a 24/7 post-truth news cycle filled with untrustworthy journalists, satirists, hoaxers, and fake news. She explains how even though we are guaranteed a free press, as we no longer have to pay to receive our news, we are not guaranteed a true press. As a result, it is up to the reader to discern what is true and unbiased, and what is skewed or a deliberate lie.


First off, news literacy is "the ability to use critical thinking skills to judge the reliability and credibility of news reports." (Valenza, 2016) In this age of information, it becomes all the more important for children, teens, and adults to develop news literacy in order to differentiate true news to misleading news. According to The Executive Summary, results from an experiment did not look optimistic--high school students failed to identify the source of a misleading gun law chart, and college students trusted a website's contents simply because it ended with .org. From my personal experience, my news literacy skills need work as well: though I can easily identify if a website looks shady from its formatting and grammar, if it looks polished and refined, I may believe the information provided more easily.


The other major things the author touches upon are fake news and post-truth news. People create fake news to increase foot traffic to their news website. They can do this by creating sensational rumors and stories that people will want to click on, which makes them more money. Other forms of fake news are hoax sites that deceive, satirical sites that exaggerate news, and altered images like deepfake that can fool an inexperienced eye. Fake news works because we now live in a post-truth age--meaning "objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief." (Valenza, 2016) Unfortunately, this is true. I feel jaded when I look at some news because I've seen it all before, and I only click on what interests me. As a result, I get clickbaited often. For example, a few months ago I saw an article title claiming that the government ruled Subway sandwich bread was not actually bread, but cake. I instantly clicked on the article and read it. As it turns out, it is still considered bread everywhere except for Ireland, which now classifies it as cake due to its high sugar content, so it can be taxed higher. Though this is a very innocent example, I get baited by many other catchy titles, since interest is more valued than truth.


Fortunately, Valenza leaves us with some tips to become more "news literate." She suggests we should look for legitimate About Me pages, inspect URLs, go back to the source, triangulate (fact check sources), and consider our own biases. This advice ties well into the article we read last week, "Agnotology and Epistemological Fragmentation," since it also advises us to be wary of the information we consume as it may lead us down biased political rabbit holes and other unsavory internet traps. Overall, Joyce Valenza did a good job explaining how truth can be hard to find in a post-truth world, and left the reader with helpful tips to aid them in the future.

---

### Google Search

•What would you query to see how many pages on the English Wikipedia site mention “Northeastern University”? How many results did you get?

> I queried [Northeastern University site:en.wikipedia.org](https://www.google.com/search?q=Northeastern+University+site%3Aen.wikipedia.org&sxsrf=AOaemvJkIX-UdLhU7UWnNxIKWOR50ZsNwg%3A1632339643772&ei=u4ZLYfGyLuXl5NoP3ciOwAk&oq=Northeastern+University+site%3Aen.wikipedia.org&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EANKBAhBGAFQp7hoWL_SaWCP1WloAXAAeACAAcYCiAGnBJIBBTMuMy0xmAEAoAEBoAECwAEB&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwix_PmEq5PzAhXlMlkFHV2kA5gQ4dUDCA8&uact=5&tbas=0&biw=1500&bih=857&dpr=2). I received about 69,600 results.

•What would you query to see web pages about the skate fish but no pages about an “ice rink”?

> I queried [skate fish -ice -rink](https://www.google.com/search?q=skate+fish+-ice+-rink&biw=1500&bih=857&sxsrf=AOaemvJZY04AdOeAUVRj5_kAKogALD6WOg%3A1632341653257&ei=lY5LYeqbD8Hk5NoPt4uZsAs&oq=skate+fish+-ice+-rink&gs_lcp=Cgdnd3Mtd2l6EAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsAMyBwgAEEcQsANKBAhBGABQ0Z0BWNGdAWDDnwFoAXACeACAAQCIAQCSAQCYAQCgAQHIAQjAAQE&sclient=gws-wiz&ved=0ahUKEwiqupPDspPzAhVBMlkFHbdFBrYQ4dUDCA8&uact=5).

•What would you query to see web pages about the Northeastern Huskies from the first day of 2001 through the last day of 2002?
>I queried [Northeastern Huskies](https://www.google.com/search?q=Northeastern+Huskies&biw=1500&bih=857&sxsrf=AOaemvLLWRWI2lGDv-hCrjarqg7bodEq0g%3A1632341758075&source=lnt&tbs=cdr%3A1%2Ccd_min%3Ajanuary+1_2+2001%2Ccd_max%3Adecember+31_2+2002&tbm=) and typed in January 1st, 2001 to December 31st, 2002 into the Advanced search tool.

•Find me the top image of a pair of penguins with a “Creative Commons” license, sometimes referred to as “labeled for reuse with modification.”
>[Here it is.](https://www.google.com/search?q=pair%20of%20penguins&tbm=isch&hl=en&tbs=il:cl&sa=X&ved=0CAAQ1vwEahcKEwiIx___s5PzAhUAAAAAHQAAAAAQAg&biw=1483&bih=857#imgrc=W1D-qmmPBKfJ0M)

---

### Web credibility

[Here](https://mtonews.com/rihannas-pregnant-we-got-details-receipts) is an article from 2018 that claims famous music artist Rihanna was pregnant with her then boyfriend, Hassan Jameel. I know this claim is false, and I will use what I learned to explain how I can tell this source is untrustworthy.

Berkeley Library's guide to evaluating sources tells readers to consider several things before believing information.

1. Authority - Who is the author? What is their point of view?
The author is only listed as "MTO Staff," as the website is called MTO News. This news website wants as many clicks as possible to gain revenue, so they are likely to create sensational articles.
3. Purpose - Why was the source created? Who is the intended audience?
This source was created to report on celebrity and other sensational news, specifically relating to African Americans. MTO News' tagline is "The Most Visited African American News Network." Its intended audience is African Americans and other people who are invested in celebrities and other sensational news.
5. Publication & format - Where was it published? In what medium?
It was digitally published on the MTO News website on October 26, 2018.
10. Documentation - Did they cite their sources? Who did they cite?
The authors did not cite any sources, and only referred to sources as "people EXTREMELY close to the couple," and "Rihanna's unofficial spokespeople". The article contains a supposedly screenshotted Instagram post from Rihanna, but there is no reliable way to verify if it is real, and is likely doctored.

#### Using all of these clues, we can believe with reasonable suspicion that this article is fake news. In addition, the article is riddled with inconsistent grammar and punctuation, which is a dead giveaway for an untrustworthy news source.

---

### Wikipedia evaluation
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 does these claims relate to the policy of Wikipedia:Verifiability? Would you suggest any changes to the page?

> According to Wikipedia, the information stated on the site must be [verifiable](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Verifiability). This means that the claims stated must come from a reliable source, and can be fact checked. Poorly or unsourced information, particularly about living people, should be removed.
>
> With this in mind, the claim that Joseph Reagle worked at the World Wide Web Consortium is **verifiable**. Reference #5 shows that he co-authored a paper at W3C in 1996 and left W3C in January 2004.
>
><img src="https://i.imgur.com/nLJywU9.png" alt="drawing" width="400"/>
>
>As for the second claim, Reagle's book "Good Faith Collaboration" cannot be verified to be bestselling. Though the book did receive reviews, there is no source that proves the book was a bestseller.
>
>As a result, I would suggest to keep the W3C claim and remove the bestselling book claim.

According to its history, when was this article first created?

> This article was first created on July 31st, 2012 by a user named Robofish.