Woolsey: Credibility Does Persist Online, but Needs New Tools
Filed at 9:36 am on November 23, 2006 in Credibility • Leave a comment
Most suggest that credibility dissolves in the digital domain. I think the opposite is true. Traditional lineages persist, and we can respond to concerns by limiting access or further developing the net.
In most traditional media we encounter, we expect that professionals have verified the credibility of the information presented to some degree. Our judgment of “to what degree” it has been verified is based on our prior experience with the information source, the branding of the source, and the positioning of the source. Supermarket tabloids are considered differently than Time Magazine, and similarly differently than the New York Times. Digital media provide replications of these media sources, branded for online consumption. And many of the same rules apply from “paper to net”—- NY Times Online is considered much the same as the New York Times (and most of it is identical of course).
Noting that most of the news sources that most are viewing online have traditional lineages, and work in much the same way, it is compelling to note that digital media also encourages “the wild and wooly”. Anyone can post anything, and many are clever enough to gain substantial readership for postings. Also, “cross-verifications” can be quite easily developed, so that cross references of multiple non-credible sources can quickly give the appearance of credibility.
The obvious response to all of the concern with credibility is to develop critical viewers, the response that has been offered for decades to this same general issue. The other natural response is to limit postings to only those elements that are judged credible by “authorities”; many nations are taking this approach to limiting the net in their own ways—- hopefully this will not become the major trend in this new wide open communications channel!
A more promising approach, it seems to me, is to develop the net to assess credibility and to develop networks which can assess cross references/ prior histories/ multiple sources/reliability of sources etc. The challenge in this approach is to develop metrics of credibility that are widely accepted, and to discern the differences between verifiable fact and multiple interpretations and advocacy. (For a sample noteworthy effort, check out newstrust.net.)
Next: Kate Wittenberg: Shifting from Publisher Authority to Participation > >
< < Previous: Deanna Kuhn: What develops?
Save or share this post
Tags
Tags: censorship, credibility-assessment, lineage
Comments (0)
No comments yet.
Robust discussion/debate is encouraged. Comments are reviewed before posting to ensure they are on topic and do not promote commercial products or services.
Add a Comment