How do I judge the value of expertise on the Web? Does it
differ from my notion of expertise in face-to-face settings? Why or why not?
If the article I read on the web has valuable information that indicates that the person is an expert, I would value expertise on the web more than in face-to-face because the article would be open to critique and revision. However, some times I cannot tell from the appearance of the source whether it is trustworthy or not. For example, some readings we have in this course are personal blogs that I would not have trusted if I found them by myself just because they are not published in a journal. If I know that the person I read his/her work on the web is an expertise, I would definitely value his/her work even if it is a personal blog. But if I do not know the author, I would trust articles that have more interaction.
If the article I read on the web has valuable information that indicates that the person is an expert, I would value expertise on the web more than in face-to-face because the article would be open to critique and revision. However, some times I cannot tell from the appearance of the source whether it is trustworthy or not. For example, some readings we have in this course are personal blogs that I would not have trusted if I found them by myself just because they are not published in a journal. If I know that the person I read his/her work on the web is an expertise, I would definitely value his/her work even if it is a personal blog. But if I do not know the author, I would trust articles that have more interaction.
Hi Sam, that is one of the dilemmas faced with online content. I have similar challenges, but what I find useful is to 'test the waters' or in our Web 2.0 lingo 'be a lurker' for a while. This helps in validating the source(s) to make sure that they are credible and in some instances that their values align with what you consider important.
ReplyDelete