Who do you trust?

Sun Aug 29 11:46:08 2004 Who do you trust?
Posted by Tony Lawrence
Search Keys: browsing
Referencing: http://techdirt.com/articles/20040827/0132238.shtml

The above link leads to an interesting TechDirt article where a traditional reporter complains about the inherent inaccuracy of information sources such as Wikipedia etc. The reporter's claim boils down to simply that you can't trust the rabble, and you need experts (reporters, one presumes) to present facts.

Well, OK. It's true that sometimes you can't trust a mob. When a subject becomes emotionally charged (for example the SCO Lawsuit), it's quite possible for mob-rule sources to be distorted by emotions and make it impossible for a balanced view to be presented.

But that's also true of reporters and "experts". Back before the Wright brothers, you could find plenty of scientific "experts" who could explain why mechanical flight was impossible.

From The Wright Brothers Chapter Seven

More than once Professor Newcomb had written that flight without gas-bags would require the discovery of some new metal or a new unsuspected force in Nature. Then, in an article in The Independent - October 22, 1903, while the Wrights were at Kitty Hawk assembling their power machine - he not only proved that trying to fly was nonsense, but went further and showed that even if a man did fly, he wouldn't dare to stop. "Once he slackens his speed, down he begins to fall. - Once he stops, he falls a dead mass. How shall he reach the ground without destroying his delicate machinery? I do not think that even the most imaginative inventor has yet put on paper a demonstrative, successful way of meeting this difficulty."

So really, the same arguments about prejudice and inaccuracy apply everywhere. You can't implicitly trust Wikipedia or the New York Times. The librarian quoted in the original article says "part of my job is to help my students develop critical thinking skills"; those are just as necessary with any source, no matter what its reputation is.

However, bulletin boards, newsgroups, and Wikis at least offer the potential for other views to creep in. You get to read other points of view, unsanitized by corporate policy. Yes, that can let a lot of junk in also, but if you are thinking logically, the junk should fall out rather easily. Personally, I'd rather read multiple points of view and decide for myself.

Comments?

More Articles by Tony Lawrence - Find me on Google+

Jump to Comments

Many of the products and books I review are things I purchased for my own use. Some were given to me specifically for the purpose of reviewing them. I resell or can earn commissions from the sale of some of these items. Links within these pages may be affiliate links that pay me for referring you to them. That's mostly insignificant amounts of money; whenever it is not I have made my relationship plain. I also may own stock in companies mentioned here. If you have any question, please do feel free to contact me.

Specific links that take you to pages that allow you to purchase the item I reviewed are very likely to pay me a commission. Many of the books I review were given to me by the publishers specifically for the purpose of writing a review. These gifts and referral fees do not affect my opinions; I often give bad reviews anyway.

We use Google third-party advertising companies to serve ads when you visit our website. These companies may use information (not including your name, address, email address, or telephone number) about your visits to this and other websites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services of interest to you. If you would like more information about this practice and to know your choices about not having this information used by these companies, click here.