More Silence Please.
Mathematics and Privacy Empower. Businesses Give Too.
How to Report a Possible Charity Scam. Whos in Charge? Around the World Wide Web with. The Dirty Dozen. Is It Bias or Selection? Document Processor.
The Court Is Now in Session. Countering a Cybersmear of Your Company. She is currently the director of knowledge management at Forbes Inc. She lives in New York City. Mintz Information Today, Inc. Anne P. Most of these candidates have already been investigated pretty thoroughly by the press, bloggers and people trying to defeat them, so there shouldn't be too many surprises this year. AM: I think it's useful to know if a site is sponsored by someone or an organization that has given to a campaign.
For that I go to opensecrets. I also recommend looking at the candidates' campaign websites. While they are going to be highly flattering of the candidate, they will likely also address negative rumors and debunk them. NOW: Do you think people question information they read on the computer less than in the paper? I think people understand the political leanings of their local papers and view information there with a corrective lens to neutralize the bias if they wish to.
They've now had years of experience with spam for lots of unwanted e-mails and have figured out that anyone can and will write just about anything. They will begin to do figure that out about Internet sites.
NOW : What questions do you recommend people ask themselves in order to think more critically about what they read? AM: Has the source of this information been identified by name and affiliation?
If the information comes from an anonymous source, ask yourself why they are willing to speak for the record but not by name. Ask yourself why such unsourced information is being used by the "publisher" of the information. Can this be confirmed by other sources? Has anyone else published this with confirmed sources? Who are the sources of this information and are they credible? If there's only one source, be suspicious.
NOW: Do you think rumors on the Web can damage a candidate's chance of getting elected? What are counter measures candidates can take? How do you think the rumor mill affects how people decide to vote? AM: This has more to do with bloggers than specific websites. Bloggers per se are not a problem. However, rumors on the Web don't get there without a source, and many rumors are put out there by bloggers.
Bloggers are individuals with very loud megaphones, and there are millions of them. Some of those are writing about politics, and it's impossible to counter every statement by one of them. Of course, there have been stories debunked by bloggers as well, making them part of the solution at times. We need to evaluate the information from blogs the same way we evaluate all other statements by sources.
I'm not sure this was initially a Web rumor, but the Web sure spread it quickly enough without any financial cost to the accusers. The Swift Boat Veterans seem to have done a great deal of damage to John Kerry's presidential campaign. The common wisdom is that he didn't reply fast enough or vehemently enough to the charges. In comparison, the Hillary Clinton campaign doesn't let 24 hours go by without a reply to an attack.
I would imagine that it goes the same for attacks by well-known bloggers. Because there have been members of Congress who have been taken down by true rumors on blogs they have to be taken seriously. Mark Foley of Florida resigning from the US House of Representatives after inappropriate e-mails to interns were made public comes to mind It follows that false rumors of that nature can also damage a person's employment and future chance of employment, including political candidates and elected officials.
It will be interesting to see if any bloggers get sued for slander or libel I'm not a lawyer , because of false statements they make on the Web. This is as yet untested. NOW: How would you go about tracing the origins of a rumor on the Web? Let's say for example, the rumor about Hillary Clinton, that she refused to meet with a group of mothers whose sons died in Iraq for more info, see " Mud in your inbox " AM: Sometimes it helps to start with search engines like Ask.
The 'authentic' has replaced the reproducible. Journal of English for Academic Purposes. Anne P. During the period to there was an extraordinary expansion of libraries, by universities and nations. Standard quantum mechanics asserts that an interference pattern of electrons passing through a double slit must have a certain distribution as the number of electrons approaches infinity. Best results were obtained from Decision Tree classifier, we got 97 percent accuracy in predicting fake images from real. Crowdsourcing draws on the expertise of large numbers of readers or viewers to discern possible problems in news coverage, and it can be an effective way to deal with fake news.
They are useful for confirming or debunking the rumors that have been circulated. One needs to use critical, skeptical judgment when viewing the "results" list—but that's a really good way to get to the sites like truthorfiction. Based on over 20 years as a professional librarian doing research for a media organization, I find anything from Congressional Quarterly or Facts on File to be accurate and credible because they are neutral and fact-based.
Therefore, the Politifact.
Web of Deception: Misinformation on the Internet [Anne P. Mintz, Steve Forbes] on quiswagrerosbend.gq *FREE* shipping on qualifying offers. As the Internet has. Published by Emerald Group Publishing Limited; Citation: Paul Sturges, () " Web of Deception: Misinformation on the Internet", Online Information Review.
Another site I would check is Urban Legends. They have a section on politics, which I'm sure will grow over the next year.
They research and document their findings on major rumors, although not all are here. NOW: How do you think mainstream news sites should report on rumors? AM: Mainstream news should report on news, not rumors. Only if the fact of the rumor's existence is newsworthy should it be reported. If the details of the rumor have been confirmed by the media organization, then the facts only should be reported. No examples come to mind.
NOW: What is the danger of disinformation on the web during the Election? AM: The danger of disinformation is always the same, in an election or in any other aspect of life, namely that people will make bad decisions based on bad information. And seeing the chance to profit by those bad decisions will motivate liars and cheats to lie and cheat all the more. The Internet has made it possible to disseminate it more quickly and cheaply, so I'm sure we'll start seeing more of it soon. I expect that bloggers and the mainstream media will be on top of this, given recent experiences.
NOW: What can you learn from checking out sites that do create and spread rumors? How or does it inform public discourse? AM: I think when one goes to a site that has a rumor that is suspicious and one sees the other content on the site, it can bring perspective to the rumor itself.