As an exploration, more likely a validation, I used November’s
MAPping information system to critically assess the DHMO.org site and its
validity as an information resource.
Looking at this site’s URL, I only recognized the site’s extension
as identifying it as an organization.
Honestly, I usually trust sites that have this marker, but after
discovering that it means “any organization” I find myself doubting many of the
sources I’ve cited in the past. That
aside, I tested the site’s credibility by reviewing its embedded links and
external links which I found using AltaVista and a link command. Amongst its embedded links were reputable
sites belonging to the CDC (Center for Disease Control & Prevention), the
Sierra Club, the National Cancer Institute, and the EPA (Environmental
Protection Agency). The links found
through AltaVista showed a less convincing picture. Although there were links from known
organizations such as the Public Broadcasting Station, many were links to
little known sites or discussion boards.
Many of these included key words such as “spam” or “corrupted scientific
findings”. This does much to destroy any
credibility that it might have gained from its embedded links.
Following the exploration of the site’s links, I searched
for its main idea through various search engines. From using Excite, I found that it appears to
rely on other search engines’ page indexes for their search results. Every find was accompanied by which search
engine it could be found on. The results
were also listed starting with those which had been sponsored or paid to be
listed first. These included retail
sites mostly. When making the same
search on Google, I did not encounter the same sponsored sites. Instead sites appeared to be listed based on
the number of times these particular words had been indexed. This made for a more unbiased search, but not
necessarily unbiased results. Lastly, I
conducted the same search on Yahoo and found a happy medium between my previous
searches. Yahoo did have ads but instead
of listing them so that the user had to scroll through them first, the ads were
listed alongside the unsponsored keyword based search results. Those results were eclectic and included
every type of extension which led me to make a link-command search of some of
its results. This appears to have some
control over placement. From these
different search results, and background information, I can determine that
those engines that are independently run offer more unsponsored results that
are listed based on relativity and accuracy.
They tend to use keyword searching and link analysis to pick the best
results for you to choose from. This
only limits the needed cross-checking of the results for reliability and sadly,
doesn’t eliminate them.
Using the Easywhois index, I found that DHMO.org was created
by a single person in 1999. This is 2
years later than its web published creation date. The bottom of the page has its creation set
in 1997. All in all, an organization
created by a single person begs the reconsideration of its validity. The register address of the publisher is also
false. When searched for, the address is
located in Colonia, New Jersey rather than the reported Newark. Again, this is not nearly as dependable as I
would like.
The purpose of this site was to introduce objective
information subjectively. Everything that
this site shows is in fact true but spun in such a way that a false,
opinionated, and connotatively hilarious meaning takes form. This brings the site into a more
entertainment-based category. The
information of this site has changed very little, but continues to include
other links to information that helps to build up this issue into a possibly
real problem for those who do not fully explore its background.
This whole experience has really shaken my
ability to trust sources of information.
I feel a need to question almost everything that I used to take at face
value. To summarize my response to this
activity, I need to check my sources’ sources’ sources. These tools that I’ve encountered through this
journey behind the webpage will to establish what is valid, real, unbiased, and
accurate enough to form solid and well established opinions and viewpoints of
my own. I’ve seen beyond that veil of
virtual innocence and I do not like that I now have to assume that it simply
covers another one.
No comments:
Post a Comment