Reading Report #5
By: Paul S. Piper
“Web Hoaxes, Counterfeit Sites, and Other Spurious Information on the Internet.”
This article was all about misinformation on the web and the various forms this misinformation comes in, such as, counterfeit websites, suspicious websites, fictitious websites, spoofs/parodies and even news and media reports. Mr. Piper cites many examples of counterfeit websites including the well known “martinlutherking.org” as examples of misinformation. This site may look harmless to the untrained eye, but if evaluated, you notice that the site’s sponsor is a white nationalist group and the information claims all types of things about Dr. King, including his link to communism, and abuse. Piper goes on to explain about a number of other sites though in appearance look professional, sophisticated and reliable are really completely false or claiming to be something they are not. The World Trade Organization’s website was falsified to a point in which, an Austrian trade group invited one of the false members to speak at a conference. This counterfeiting websites is a serious hoax, that believe it or not many people fall for. There is not only counterfeit websites but just plain misleading websites that steer people in the wrong direction regarding, their health and business matters. Some of the most susceptible to this misinformation are elderly and young people.
This whole reading just confirms to me and hopefully everyone that knowing how to evaluate and confirm information found online is a skill that is a must nowadays. There is so much misinformation, disinformation, and false information out there on the World Wide Web, being able to critically evaluate what you find is essential to success in school and in life. I also think that this issue of misinformation is why most professors strictly limit what resources students use in papers. I know that I was required to use only peer reviewed and scholarly articles found in a database on most of my papers and such. I guess I know why now!
Monday, November 17, 2008
Friday, November 14, 2008
News Report #5
News Report #5
EAST LONGMEADOW, Mass., Nov 13, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE)
By: Rebecca Woelfel, Hunter Public Relations
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Hasbro-Donates-300000-Games-Public/story.aspx?guid=%7BED778EB3-D2BD-4D7A-BF29-39961CC5EDF7%7D
This article was about the Hasbro Company, who is a worldwide leader in producing family, and children’s entertainment products. Some of their most recognizable products include “GI Joe”, “Mr. Potato Head” and “transformers” to name a few, though Hasbro does not just stick to toys, but family games are a leading product. Their newest being PICTUREKA! which is a game of picture hunt. Hasbro is a supporter of local communities and libraries alike and has donated $300,000 in games to local libraries in honor of the First Annual National Gaming Day hosted by the American Library Association. By inviting communities to play PICTUREKA! and other games on National Gaming Day, Hasbro and the American Library Association are helping to raise awareness about the benefits of playing games to learn in libraries and incorporating games into educational programs with the philosophy that everyone should have access to learning and fun.
I think that the American Library Associations, National Gaming Day is a wonderful idea for children and families alike to get together, learn, play, and have fun. Hasbro’s donation of so many of their new and popular games is just a show, of not just a company but of people’s dedication to learning. Supporting public libraries is so important because some just do not have the funds for things like this. Hasbro really made this day possible at many community libraries due to their donation and caring. This news story should be emphasized to show that some people in this world still do care about others, and it’s not even Christmas yet. Ha/ha!
EAST LONGMEADOW, Mass., Nov 13, 2008 (BUSINESS WIRE)
By: Rebecca Woelfel, Hunter Public Relations
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/Hasbro-Donates-300000-Games-Public/story.aspx?guid=%7BED778EB3-D2BD-4D7A-BF29-39961CC5EDF7%7D
This article was about the Hasbro Company, who is a worldwide leader in producing family, and children’s entertainment products. Some of their most recognizable products include “GI Joe”, “Mr. Potato Head” and “transformers” to name a few, though Hasbro does not just stick to toys, but family games are a leading product. Their newest being PICTUREKA! which is a game of picture hunt. Hasbro is a supporter of local communities and libraries alike and has donated $300,000 in games to local libraries in honor of the First Annual National Gaming Day hosted by the American Library Association. By inviting communities to play PICTUREKA! and other games on National Gaming Day, Hasbro and the American Library Association are helping to raise awareness about the benefits of playing games to learn in libraries and incorporating games into educational programs with the philosophy that everyone should have access to learning and fun.
I think that the American Library Associations, National Gaming Day is a wonderful idea for children and families alike to get together, learn, play, and have fun. Hasbro’s donation of so many of their new and popular games is just a show, of not just a company but of people’s dedication to learning. Supporting public libraries is so important because some just do not have the funds for things like this. Hasbro really made this day possible at many community libraries due to their donation and caring. This news story should be emphasized to show that some people in this world still do care about others, and it’s not even Christmas yet. Ha/ha!
Wednesday, November 5, 2008
Reading #4
Reading #4
“Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?”
By: Brock Read
This article examines the reliability of Wikipedia (the online encyclopedia) and ways to make the encyclopedia more reliable and accurate. Alexander M.C. Halavais a professor of communications at Quinnipiac College, preformed a little self test on this encyclopedia which everyone and anyone can contribute to by placing incorrect information in a number of different articles online. Expecting these inaccurate facts to go unnoticed, he was surprised to find that of all 13 inaccuracies placed throughout the online articles every single one was found and corrected within three hours of publication. The editors of Wikipedia also sought Mr. Halavais out to ask him to refrain from writing inaccurate material. The debate within academia is whether or not Wikipedia could ever be a truly reliable resource due to the fact that anyone can contribute and professors and experts are not given priority in publishing accurate material. The answer for some is yes while others are still skeptics. A number of research studies have been conducted comparing well established encyclopedias such as Britannica with Wikipedia and the results were favorable to the online publication. While Britannica averaged about three mistakes per article Wikipedia averaged only four per article on the same topic. Supporters of Wikipedia admit that some areas such as humanities are not as extensive and detailed as others but that is why wikipedians are pushing for professors and scholars to publish and help right some wrongs.
I believe that Wikipedia can be a valuable resource if used correctly. I personally would not take everything in Wikipedia at face value due to the fact that anyone can publish. Someone with no more expertise than I can add and edit information on Wikipedia with no checkpoint before its put out into internet space. Even if the information is wrong and will be corrected in a few hours, what about the people that look up that information and find if during that time… Wikipedia can be a good starting place for research but I have to say always verify, verify, verify with other sources before you believe.
“Can Wikipedia Ever Make the Grade?”
By: Brock Read
This article examines the reliability of Wikipedia (the online encyclopedia) and ways to make the encyclopedia more reliable and accurate. Alexander M.C. Halavais a professor of communications at Quinnipiac College, preformed a little self test on this encyclopedia which everyone and anyone can contribute to by placing incorrect information in a number of different articles online. Expecting these inaccurate facts to go unnoticed, he was surprised to find that of all 13 inaccuracies placed throughout the online articles every single one was found and corrected within three hours of publication. The editors of Wikipedia also sought Mr. Halavais out to ask him to refrain from writing inaccurate material. The debate within academia is whether or not Wikipedia could ever be a truly reliable resource due to the fact that anyone can contribute and professors and experts are not given priority in publishing accurate material. The answer for some is yes while others are still skeptics. A number of research studies have been conducted comparing well established encyclopedias such as Britannica with Wikipedia and the results were favorable to the online publication. While Britannica averaged about three mistakes per article Wikipedia averaged only four per article on the same topic. Supporters of Wikipedia admit that some areas such as humanities are not as extensive and detailed as others but that is why wikipedians are pushing for professors and scholars to publish and help right some wrongs.
I believe that Wikipedia can be a valuable resource if used correctly. I personally would not take everything in Wikipedia at face value due to the fact that anyone can publish. Someone with no more expertise than I can add and edit information on Wikipedia with no checkpoint before its put out into internet space. Even if the information is wrong and will be corrected in a few hours, what about the people that look up that information and find if during that time… Wikipedia can be a good starting place for research but I have to say always verify, verify, verify with other sources before you believe.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)