This topic contains 39 replies, has 15 voices, and was last updated by 
-
Posts
-
If you were going to apply Rheingold’s techniques to this chapter, what would it look like? Do you trust him as the author of this book? Why or why not? That is, what is it about the book—its design, its form, the style—that makes it seem (or, perhaps, not seem) trustworthy? How does your “experience and engagement” (p. 84) with books and reading affect your approach to the text, and how can you apply (or not apply) that experience to information-seeking online? As with each discussion post, compose a short essay of more than 150 words that engages with these questions.
-
In applying Rheingold’s techniques to this chapter I would first start by examining the source(s) behind his writing. I reviewed the publishing company MIT Press books and found no reason to distrust the printing company. Next I examined Rheingold’s own motives for the text, I found that I believe him to be trustworthy based on the context of the text. This text doesn’t seem to set out to hurt anyone, to slander anything or try to influence anyone to convert their lifestyle rather its purpose is to educate which I can’t see any huge benefit for the author in. When analyzing the texts design I found that it also lends to the overall trustworthiness of the author. The book is designed so that it reads and looks like a text that one reads in order to advance their knowledge of proper internet practices. The font is simple and plain allowing for easy reading. The author uses a combination of sarcasm and supported research in order to establish the seriousness of the subject matter while still maintaining a relaxed tone. Being a college student I approach most reading with an expectation that the text is designed to teach and will probably do so in a strict, formal format. When approaching this text I expect a degree of formal education to take place, when applying that same process to the web I tend to look for information found on educational sites (such as .gov or .edu) as I have come to trust these type of text more out of habit. I find text to be unreliable based on the format and source due to my history of using educational text primarily when in all reality valuable information can be found outside of this genre.
-
In applying Rheingold’s techniques to this chapter of Net Smart, I would use what he calls the “triangulation” method that journalists use (p. 79) and look for three sources of credibility. In this case, I have to look at the book itself, though. The first thing that makes me trust the content is the book was published by a reputable publishing company. Not that self-publishing is bad, but I put more stock in a book that has a publishing company behind it. The book is professionally designed and illustrated, not sloppily put together, which is helpful towards establishing trust. Rheingold also cites his sources, which goes a long way in establishing trust as these sources can be found and used to fact-check what he writes.
I think this triangulation method is a good rule of thumb to be applied online as well, except my opinion of the book design cannot equate to website design. As Rheingold points out (p. 79), just because a website is professionally designed does not mean that the content is accurate; however, aside from design, citing sources and having an about page or bio that speaks to the author(s) work/life experience is a good starting point to finding another credible source to verify the author is who they say they are and have the experience listed.
-
I trust Rheingold as an author for two reasons. Within the context of this class, I trust the book as a credible source before I even start reading because I trust that my professor wouldn’t give the class a crap book to educate ourselves with. Now that I think about it, that might be naïve of me but, in theory, that’s something that I should be able to assume. If I was reading this book outside of the class, I would feel I could trust the author because he references sources a lot and, as he says, he does this so that the readers can check to make sure he’s credible.
As for my “experience and engagement” with reading books in general, I know that I am most engaged when the content I am reading is clear, concise, and organized. Even when reading novels, if the story is all over the place and hard to follow, I get tired reading it. So, it is even more true when I am reading for academic purposes. I’ve recently been doing a lot of research online for my internship. I’m working for a solar company doing marketing communications. Some of my responsibilities include doing informational emails and blog posts on the benefits of solar energy and things like financing options, government incentives, etc. These are things I know nothing about, haha. So I’ve had to research and I find that I look for sites that are .gov or .edu or that have sources I can view. I also use scholarly search engines like our library.-
I do not find it too naive that you think that about the book. I always found that the books should be credible because we are pursuing a career and should know what is right and not read something that might be wrong. Sometimes you can’t trust a professor though, but I would say about 95% of the time you can. I just say this because I had a professor where the book did not turn out as well as it should be. I probably also figure I knew it was not as accurate because I learned so much about the American Revolution already.
If a book is not clear or organized, then I always wonder off to do something else. Sometimes if the book and how it looks doesn’t appeal to me, it takes forever just for me to read a paragraph. You need to have a good flow in which you can read the whole thing with no problem and be willing to pick it up again.-
Building on what I wrote to @erheyer, I don’t think it is a good idea to frame this issue as one where you have “trust” in a professor. I sometimes assign books that are poorly argued or that I disagree with. There are lots of reasons why this might happen in a class: the book might have had an important impact on the field, it might articulate an important (though flawed) counterargument to an consensus, or simply exploring how the argument is flawed may be a beneficial example of what not to do in our writing.
-
-
I trust that my professor wouldn’t give the class a crap book to educate ourselves with
Be careful making this assumption; sometimes you can learn a lot from a crap book. Just because a book is assigned in a course doesn’t mean that it doesn’t have problems.
-
-
With obvious exceptions, as a student, I have come to accept that most texts presented in the classroom environment are for the purposes of advancing learning, and therefor would be considered legitimate works. However, in order to lend credit to Rheingold’s techniques, several things must occur. The things that come to mind first would be the motives for the book being written, was this book written for profit or is this book written to inform. Secondly, I would check the sources used and the publishing company. In addition to the above, I lastly would examine the context of the work itself. In this case, the book uses a normal font, does not attempt to be overly comical and presents information in a matter consistent with a text written to inform. Following the examination of the text, it appears to be a legitimate work written to inform the reader and therefor has given no reason not to be trusted.
-
Chasity,
I agree with your assessment of Rheingold’s textbook. I also question the purpose in some textbooks, especially since I’ve had to buy/rent required textbooks for courses that were never used, other than either the professor teaching the course had a hand in writing the textbook.
I personally like his style in that he isn’t overtly technical and writes in an easy to understand style. I have a long technical background and it is enjoyable to read a technically based book that wasn’t written by an engineer! -
Chasity,
I enjoyed your post. However, I would argue that this book is written both to inform, but also to make profit. I would also look at not only the motive, but if they author himself was knowledgeable and reputable in the subject. In the case, I do agree that the author is both knowledgeable and reputable in the subject. However, if he were not, the motive would not matter. I think you did this somewhat with checking sources. I also agree that the context is important and in this book, the author informs without being overly comical and in an organized manner. I think that his personal examples really tie together the subject and it’s relevance to our lives.
-
I agree with you in that as a student, I would trust this book because my professor assigned it. This may be a naive way of thinking, but I do trust my professors. I also agree with you the text is well written and it makes it easier to understand. While some of the terminology and concepts may be over my head, the author makes his intent manageable to comprehend. The fact that the book is written with several demonstrations and examples also helps to digest the information being presented, and the examples help to bolster his credibility.
-
-
-
Chasity,
I would have to disagree with you as far as the writing style of the author. Although I find that he makes valid points throughout concerning using ones mind, but often his writing is repetitive and off track. I find that in textbooks, there is a logical order and there are not smattered, random thoughts commingled.
-
-
In applying Rheingold’s techniques to this chapter I would first research his sources and company to make sure the information is valid and it’s a credible source. I trust and enjoyed his techniques and style of writing for various reasons. For starters his style of writing is very relatable, he includes numerous examples and real life experiences about his topics. For example on page 78 Rheingold tells a story of how his daughter was using invalid websites to search things. He explained to her how everything on the internet isn’t as it seems. He found a website on Martin Luther King Jr., and later realized this site was created by a group of white supremacist. The examples he presents make topics easy to read and understand. The author also mentions plenty of sources in his book, just so his audience something to check. That alone makes me comfortable as a reader, to know that the information I am being fed is valid. As far as my experience and engagement with books, I am sure that this is a well written book, there are plenty of things I have read that has had me all over the place. This text was straightforward easy to understand and credible which makes this a well written book in my eyes.
-
Kayla,
I like that you point out here how relatable he is as an author which I think is what makes the text come off as trustworthy. In my own post I address that there doesn’t seem to be an alternative motive to the text so I don’t see any reason not to trust him, however after reading your post I find that his relatability likely put me at ease as well. I also found the Martin Luther King Jr. site example to be striking and I think that it really opened my mind to how a general site can have a much darker purpose. -
Kayla, that was also my favorite example in Chapter 2. It actually reminded me quite a lot of the articles I see shared frequently on Facebook. There are so many stories that are from websites that have a hidden agenda and use the social media site as a platform to promote their “propaganda” if you will. One of the other, more glaring giveaways to a sites credibility is spelling and grammar errors. It baffles me when I see even the most simple of mistakes by “professionals”. Great post!
-
-
I trust this book because of how it is presented and it being from a publishing company. This is a book I would pick up on the shelf if I was walking by. Rheingold is giving opinions and examples to how achieve online. He seems to know what he is doing and he is also proving that by having the sources. Having sources is a key to any book like this, or history book. You need to back up your information to draw an audience in to believe them. In just 32 pages, he has 117 footnotes. For just the 32 pages, that seems like a lot, compared to other books I have looked into. This is showing that it is a trustworthy book because he is backing up his information. When I received this book in the mail, I could not get over how shiny the cover looked and neat as well. The colors work and there was not much on the cover which made it not overwhelming.
This book is for a class, so looking at it, I need to look at it in more of an academic standpoint then just for a fun read. It is going to well written and straight to the point. I am hoping though that it is clear and someone like me, with a learning disability, can learn from it with not asking too many questions. I need a reliable book and website. When it comes to my three capstone classes and I need to do research, I will not be on Wikipedia. I will be using .gov or .edu because those might not be 100% accurate, but they will be more accurate because they come from a government or educational place. When I am looking for a new publishing company when it comes to book 2, I will be looking for well known places and see what they have to offer on their websites because we know more of them then smaller businesses.
-
First off, I love the term crap detector. I do trust Rheingold as the author of this book. When reading books I often feel like I’m in the author’s head. In Rheingold’s case, I definitely am. He makes me look at things differently and think about people in a new way. The text also seems trustworthy because the author uses quotes to support his thoughts and theories, like the Ernest Hemingway quote on page 77. This type of style seems trustworthy to me. It also makes Rheingold relatable to his readers. I’m a fan of Hemingway and I can appreciate Rheingold’s decision to include his quote.
My “experience and engagement” are shaky on this topic. I enjoy reading so my experience with this book as a text has been more than enjoyable. Though, I am not experienced in the online world and some of Rheingold’s words go completely over my head or make me feel like I need to immerse myself into my computer and never return. The style of the book is engaging as well as Rheingold, but the information itself loses me too often. I’m not sure how I could apply this to information-seeking online.
-
I too also liked how he used the term “crap detector”. It gave the book some comedy appeal. I also agree with you that Rheingold has the influence to make you look at things differently. I found the book to be well related to his audience and feel that this book would be helpful to anyone with questions regarding the issue.
-
-
Rheingold explains at the beginning of the chapter on page 78 to “look for an author,” and from there dig deeper. He explained at the top of page 79 that “good credibility testing is a process, not a one-shot answer.” At the bottom of page 79, Rheingold talks about journalists using “‘triangulating’ by checking three different, credible sources.” On the subsequent pages, he gives examples of things to check for when looking at specific websites. With these instructions in mind, I would first search Rheingold’s name. From there, I would look through those results to see if I could find something about his credentials. I then would search to see if I could find anything on feedback sites. I often go to Amazon read feedback when I’m looking for a product, a book, et cetera. I personally like feedback sites because the remarks are usually from individuals who are unbiased about a particular product and are just commenting about their personal thoughts and experiences. I judge the feedback based on how the comment is composed, whether it is grammatically correct, and whether the person leaves specific and detailed remarks. After checking credentials and feedback, then I would need to look for a third reference to finish my triangle. At this point, I could check a credible website to see what comments were made by a professional. In this instance, I looked on an .edu site to see what was being said.
At this point, I would trust him as the author of this book. I think the book is trustworthy because the information he presented was neutral and he gave several references to support his examples.
As for “experience and engagement” with books and text, I prefer things that are well-written, organized, and flow well. I look for this on online sites too. If the text is not organized and streamlined, I do not want to waste my time trying to comprehend the meaning. So if I am information-seeking online, the website design would need to be organize and easy to use and have the relevant information quickly available for me to access.
-
Did you do any of the things you describe in your first paragraph? If so, what did you find?
-
I agree, I like things to be organized when reading! It enhances my comprehension and interest level. Rheingold is definitely organized. I liked that he used headings and sub-headings in his book to organize his thoughts. It seems like you did a lot of research to find out if Rheingold was a credible author. For me, I went for the emotional appeal. I felt that what he was saying and showing his readers was very trustworthy. He engages with his readers in a way that doesn’t seem like he’s trying too hard and I appreciate that.
-
-
I would trust Rheingold due to his pedigree working at the Institute of Noetic Sciences, which is a non-profit research institute that researches topics such as meditation, consciousness, psychic abilities etc., and Xerox PARC, which is now just known as the Palo Alto Research Center, which is known for developments such as laser printing, Ethernet, GUI and object oriented programming (Wikipedia_Howard_Rheingold biography). When utilizing his theory of Crap Detection, it is sound logically and I have already used some of the sites he mentions such as FactCheckedED.org in other courses.
The style of writing is engaging and not too technical, which is unusual for a book that covers a topic that is technical in nature. Over the years of reading technical manuals from various software companies such as Adobe, and Lino-Type Hell, texts that cover technical information tend to be very dry and hardly readable. Howard Rheingold has the ability to translate obtuse information into a format that is readable and enjoyable.
My experience and engagement historically allows me to read technical materials and find them interesting and informative without losing my ability to absorb the material presented. I feel that depending on the subject matter and the relevance of the material directly relates to the amount of time I would fact check the author, source and facts. If it is a topic of importance to me personally or for a class, I would delve further into a topic rather than just accept it as fact, especially when it is found online.
Even when coming from so-called trusted sources like major media outlets, you can see many times that in a news topic that is dynamic, like 911 or Virginia Tech, the media overplays their reporting without gathering all the facts before releasing them as “News”.
This is why I will delve into a topic to see if it is just a repeat from a single source that is bouncing around the web, if it is important enough to me to research. If I were to research everything as Rheingold seems to suggest, that would become a full time job for anyone. Therefore, I think we should consider his suggestions and advice and apply the techniques as needed.
-
I think the last point you brought up is very important! It’s not enough to know how to check your sources, it’s also important to know when it’s necessary. I liked Rheingold’s example on pg. 82 about “good enough to settle a bar bet” vs. evidence that is reasonable to use in a dissertation defense. If all you are trying to do is amuse yourself or do something else frivolous (like settling the previously mentioned bet) a casual Google search is good enough. If you are making important decisions like who to vote for, what treatment options are most effective for your illnesses, etc., it is better to dig a little deeper!
-
Ashley,
You covered the topic very well in my opinion. As you said about good enough to settle a bar bet vs. evidence… I agree that it is critical to dig deeper into the source, facts and impartiality of anything that is on the internet. If the topic is important enough to research, then it is important enough to fact check.
-
-
Mike,
I agree that the techniques mentioned in this chapter would require and exorbitant amount of time. I believe there are more efficient methods of researching validity, as in the option you mentioned of reviewing numerous sites and matching information.
-
-
While Rheningold’s techniques are specifically used for online websites and information, I do think that they are beneficial for print sources as well. First and foremost he recommends searching the author and determining credibility and authority. To use this is for Chapter 2 in Rheingold’s book, I searched Rheingold in Google and Bing (as he advises using more than one search engine. Multiple sources confirmed his authority and credibility on the subject. Next, I searched four of the people he mentioned during the chapter, and checked his sources. These all seemed credible as well. He mentions triangulating is his chapter, and more than three sources confirmed what he was saying and his credibility. I didn’t see any grammatical errors, design issues, and his work is recent. In a course, I have learned that professors themselves often consider the authors credible before assigning the book, as well. Thus, I feel it is appropriate to trust him to be an author with authority and credibility. The informal style of writing and the organized structure make the book itself seem trustworthy and also helps with experience and engagement. By actively engaging with the text, you can inform yourself and retain the information.
I would also like to say that I enjoyed that he made the sections relatable via the discussion on journalism and medical information. I feel that these are two things that most people have trouble fact checking and need guidance on.
-
What are your thoughts on medical websites and the recent surge in self-diagnosis? The medical and pharmaceutical industries lead consumers to self-diagnose themselves and now even self-prescribe medications.
How do you think Rheingold’s techniques can be utilized to ensure that consumers are provided the most accurate information? -
I performed searches on Rheingold as well just to verify his accomplishments, etc., which of course checked out. I didn’t think about checking the people he mentions in the book, though. That’s a good idea. I did go to Rheingold’s Twitter account just to see if he is active and to read some of his tweets. My thinking is with the topic of this book, he better have some type of social media account in which he’s active and providing value-add to his followers.
I agree with you on the medical information. I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had friends or family members say, “Well, I have this symptom and I Googled it and oh, my God, I think I have X” (some really serious disease) and it’s turned out to be nothing serious. Googling, I think, is the worst thing to do before speaking to a doctor because based on some results I’ve seen for some minor symptoms, the search results will have you dead by morning. I think Google’s algorithm, though, is getting better at detecting “crap” sites and you have to really dig to find them.
-
Rheingold is fairly active on Twitter. If you tweeted a question at him about the book, I bet you have a 50% chance of getting a response.
-
-
Medical information and websites are a personal topic for me. I have a lot of health issues and it took my entire life until this summer to get them diagnosed. I don’t recommend self-diagnosis, but I think googling and getting information if you continue to have problems after initial doctor’s visits is a good idea. I think context when googling symptoms is very important and that you should always seek the opinion of a doctor (or doctors if one fails in any diagnosis.) Mentioning self-prescribing, it is very difficult to get anything but over the counter medication without a visit to a doctor.
Checking the information that you find can definitely be evaluated using Rheingold’s techniques. First, you should check sources. Some information in popular “natural medicine” magazines, do not even list sources other than the author of the article. If there are sources, I would look them up and see if the studies are actually supporting what the article says they are. Secondly, when looking up medical information, I would check reliable websites first (Mayo Clinic is one) before reading blogs or magazines that are often for profit. I would also keep in mind that, unless you’ve seen a doctor and they can’t figure out what is wrong.. I wouldn’t look into any crazy diseases. First and foremost, doctors are trained to weed out the false information and make a diagnosis. Second opinions with a different doctor are also better than looking at some blog, in my opinion.
-
-
I would certainly trust Rheingold as an expert in being “net smart” by applying his techniques to his book, Net Smart. One of the first things I really liked about the second chapter was the sheer knowledge Rheingold had of web sites specifically used to debunk wrong information on the net. Someone who is an authority in their field would know these not-so-common research tools and be able to use real examples of how they work, or perhaps do not work, just as the author did.
My engagement with texts is very similar to my approach to internet searching. I’m a skeptic by nature, so I find it validating to find flaws in the presentation of a website, or faux pas that may make me lose credibility in the information being provided. A biased opinion always seems to be smoking, and as the old idiom says, where there is smoke there is fire. In my experience, so far, I have not found that to be the case here. The information is presented in a clear, unbiased way, and backed up by reputable sources.
-
Rheingold cites his own personal experiences in determining the validity of information on the internet. For quite some time, it has been suggested that we as consumers, regard information on the internet in context. State Farm even pokes fun at the information provided on the web.
Throughout Chapter 2, Rheingold divulges techniques to help the reader ensure that the information they are reading is correct. His first advise is to verify the source. Searching for the author and what other sites reference regarding him/her. It is imperative that we validate the site we are obtaining information or using at any given time. An example of ensuring validity, and looking for the .gov or .edu address would be when searching for the free FAFSA site for financial aid. If one does not verify the .gov on the web address, you could end up on a site charging for completing this form, where otherwise there is no charge.
Although I do believe that much of this information in Chapter is relevant, Rheingold is presented as less than professional in his titles and subtitles. This lack of professionalism could lead readers to discount his advice. His findings are often contained in numerous pages reiterating the same information, and may be more powerful in a more concise and organized fashion.-
Ah! I love the example that you chose! I had forgotten that commercial even existed. It is definitely a great example of how we as a culture have kind of gotten past that first “someone on the internet published it so it has to be true” mentality. I definitely think we have more work to do on that front though, since just adding a veneer of respectability is usually enough to overcome that for most internet users even now.
I think it’s interesting that you point out Rheingold’s lack of formality in titling his chapters, and in including cartoons, etc. I think considering the publisher of the book (MIT Press) we can conclude that any informality is his attempt to engage the reader in a non-threatening way, considering this is not written as a textbook and therefore needs to be approachable to the non-academic reader. -
@pboyle623 I loved that you thought to include that commercial as well! It really is perfect for the chapter content. In line with what you said about the choice in chapter titles and with what some of our classmates have said about his writing style, I can see what you are saying about him seeming “unprofessional,” but it actually makes him more credible to me. I feel like his use of modern and relaxed language when talking about modern issues makes me want to listen to what he is saying more. I’m a huge fan of reading people who write in their own voices. I feel like I can really hear him and I think to myself, “Oh, well he really knows what he’s talking about because he has all these personal experiences.”
-
-
In evaluating this texts with Rheingold’s method, it definitively comes across as trustworthy for a number of reasons. Firstly, it was published by MIT Press, which is an authoritative source. Secondly, he is very good to quote his sources, and when he does, those sources are always leaders in their field For example, when gathering information about how search algorithms work, he spoke with the “search anthropologist” from Google (p. 86). Finally, my own experience informs me that people who are telling me to make my own decisions based on critical thinking generally don’t have ulterior motives in mind.
What Rheingold said about online game enthusiasts being less trusting (p. 84) was interesting to me, because even though he specifically discusses seventh graders, I have found that to be true in my own life and group of friends. People who spend more time on the internet as a hobby, or in certain circumstances like professional gaming/blogging, etc., tend to naturally use the “learning process” (pg. 87) to discover just how unreliable certain sources on the internet can be. It usually only takes one instance of using the wrong code and crashing your game, or being ridiculed by other members of a community for being wildly incorrect, for members of these groups to start checking up on the information they’re searching just by habit.-
Ashley, you make a really good point regarding Rheingold’s insistence on making an informed decision that is all your own with regards to internet information. There is a lot of propaganda floating around out there that is so cleverly written that many people assume it’s valid. The fact that the author has a substantial background in the subject yet he merely requests that we make an informed decision based on our own opinion and research is very telling with regard to his credibility. He’s not trying to shove his opinion down your throat, but simply giving a guideline on safe and informed internet research.
-
-
I apologize, everyone, for my lateness in posting a response. We are in trial prep at my law firm and I haven’t left the office before 11 pm for the last 2 weeks. I’m actually typing this response on my iPhone while hiding in a bathroom stall for some peace and quiet!
“Crap detection” is largely based on not only how credible a source appears, but also in finding out if the air of credibility is truly substantiated or merely just that – putting on airs. One would assume that if Rheingold wrote this book, he must have a considerable base of knowledge and experience from which to draw his conclusions. However, it’s not only the amount of education and experience an author possesses, but also the quality of his education and experience that help to determine whether he is trustworthy. Thus, we can apply Rheingold’s “triangulation” technique to determine three sources of credibility. The first source of credibility appears on the Copyright page – the book is published by MIT Press. This is a well-known and long-established publishing company, and they are also associated with one of the most highly regarded institutes of higher learning in the world. The author himself has taught this particular subject at other highly regarded institutions such as UC Berkeley and Stanford University, so this lends credence to his credibility as well. The author has also been awarded many accolades from prominent outlets, such as the Time Magazine Top 10 Best Websites list in 1996 and the MacArthur Foundation’s 2008 Digital Media and Learning Competition winner. All in all, Rheingold seems to be a pretty trustworthy source of knowledge on the subject.
As a non-traditional college student who can clearly remember a time before the internet was the standard for finding information, I tend to place a lot of emphasis on the established credibility of a book over the internet when conducting research. There is a lot of crap on the internet, and this is so because it’s a much easier medium for publishing information than getting approval and backing from a publishing company for a book. With a book, the information is scrutinized by many sets of eyes before the final form is presented for public viewing. It’s quite the opposite with the internet, where literally anyone can make a page and publish almost anything they want to say without regard for validity. That’s not to say that all books should be taken at face value for the information contained within, but it’s much more likely that you will need to use your “crap detection” methods on an internet research project.
-
Tiffany,
I agree with you about Rheingold’s “triangulation” technique That could be very useful in a lot of things, That is a great way to find credible sources. Also knowing thathis book was publishes through MIT press which is a well known company which also makes it to believe tat Rheingold’s text was trustworthy.
-
Good stuff, here. I would add that before the Internet (and continuing today), there was a lot of crap published in books and magazines and newspapers. No media is a guarantee of information quality.
-
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.