As I browsed various internet articles and their comment
threads regarding the legitimacy of information gathered over the internet and
how to personally verify the source of said information, it struck me as ironic that I was falling
into the mindset I am arguing again by blindly trusting the opinion of
anonymous strangers over the internet. After all, how credible are anonymous opinions about credibility
on the internet?
The general consensus from those I interacted with seemed to
be that internet users are “stupid/ignorant”, and that the mindset behind
internet usage and systems by which we interact online (which always seems to
involve giving away information about ourselves as a means to get through the metaphorical
door) were not the problems, the people using the internet are the problem. These discussions made me realize that the misplaced trusts that
those browsing the internet place on what they’re reading isn’t just exposing
them to misinformation, but also bias. For example as someone who grew up near
Seattle I saw enough articles on Facebook around the Superbowl to know the fact that the
NFL was “bullying” Marshawn Lynch with their fines and interviews. However, this is not fact but just an (exaggerated) opinion many of my Facebook friends from back home propagated as fact in their
bias. As I no longer trusting anonymous online reviews as a credible source on
the topic of credible sources, I decided to look for a second opinion, and so I
discussed the topic with an acquaintance of mine who is an avid blogger.
According to her, legitimacy doesn't seems to matter as much
as page views, and people will ignore common sense if information “trends”
enough. People rely on other internet users to point out discrepancies and errors in
the “facts” they read on the internet in the same way that children with
compromised immune systems trust herd immunity to keep them from getting the
measles, but in the internet’s case it appears that no one is actually getting
vaccinated.
Your acquaintance's comments are interesting in light of the enlightenment conversation we've been having in class. The internet overall is good because it helps people share information, not all of which is truthful or worthwhile. I feel like Bacon would also say that the responsibility rests on the individual to question that information.
ReplyDeleteThis mainly reminds me of the idea of certainty unbounded. The internet provides us with such varying knowledge that how can we know what is true? Without that universal set of ideals, how do we maintain order in our society? Maybe you've seen the picture about the dress with the unknown color? Some people are attacking one another over a picture! Over something trivial seen on the internet that has no meaning. I think the internet's varying ideas and lack of personal contact makes it easy to attack the ideas of other and toleration decreases.
ReplyDeleteI think your post addresses an important issue. Popularity seems to be a powerful dogma whether it be the opinion from a famous person, how many views or hits something gets. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I feel like the changing reference could be education and healthy skepticism. The problem with that dogma of 'popularity wins' could be undermined if we take what we read always with a grain of salt and sincerely evaluate its the credibility.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDelete