And bear in mind this is a blogger writing this, but there is something that has been worrying me for a little while. As a society we are very used to what we read, and particularly what we see, when it is presented as news, or information, being in the main accurate. There is a wealthy of anecdotal evidence that there are sections of society who will believe pretty much anything, taking the most inane nonsense at face value, and therein lies the problem. You, gentle reader, fellow internet explorer, have very little way of knowing if I am a 30 year business verteran with insights to divulge, a high flying scientist with detailed knowledge of my subject area, or a 14 year old culling all of my information from Wikipedia and rehashing erroneous stories. It is an interesting dilemma, particularly when you consider the amount of erroneous information out there.
Sure, Wikipedia is a great basic resource, articles being regularly amended and updated, it is even starting to turn up in the references of Phd theses but it is only really a start point, in the same way that a traditional encyclopedia only provides basic information. The point is that it is often difficult to sort the wheat from the chaff and to find sources of quality information and insight without having to spend hours filtering and reading and double checking and analysing. What works for me when I am wearing my internet browsing hat is, having found something I like, to bookmark it and keep track of it so that I can over time develop a portfolio of the content that I like.
Google is already starting to assist with this process by building up a search history for logged in users over time so that extra relevance is given to sites that are similar to sites that the user has been to before, but for me, bookmarking still works well.This is one site that I particularly like....
No comments:
Post a Comment