evaluation of internet research

In today’s easy accessible world information is just a click away, but how good is that information to you and how credible is it? It is our job as researchers to figure out how well an article can suite you before using it. My classmates and I are doing a project on a Web 2.0 communication media and in this part of our project we have to conduct the initial research for our final Web 2.0 project. With the help of Bonnie L. Tensen’s work in Research strategies for a digital age chapter five I am able to find more reliable and credible information by questioning who, what, where, when, to whom, and why about articles.

Doing research is like an experiment you start with a hypothesis or topic of research and through a process of elimination and deductive reasoning you find your answer or the correct information. For my research of Web 2.0 technologies I will be conducting research on the social networking site Facebook. I will be using a number of different search engines as well as library databases to find my information. With the information from Tensen’s research I will be able to effectively decide which site and articles are best for me and most credible.

I first wanted to look and see if I could get any credible information by searching just the word “Facebook”. I decided to use Google as my search engine because this is what I am ingrained to using when looking for things on the internet. Now as I expected I there was not that many things that looked so appealing to my needs for credible information. Actually most of the things that had came up were for signing up for Facebook or about it applications descriptions. When scrolling down though there was one link that caught my eye Facebook company profile, this looked to be a website with some credibility. After reading it is saw that there were many topics of relevant information that I could use for my research, but when I looked at the sources only some were credible while, the others any person on the internet could add their name or comment to say that they had written this information. This is not a source that I would likely include in my final presentation. Since this was the only thing that I could find from this type of search I decided it was not relevant for my needs and moved on using one of the tips Tensen says to use about Google’s advanced search.

I went onto Google and clicked advanced search preferences; with this I was able to pick a topic specific search engine just as Tensen had stated. I picked a scholar search this is one of the options that Google gives you. Also I now narrowed my search by looking for “Facebook uses” in the key words. I felt that by doing this I will be able to find more information on my topic and its uses, I thought correctly. Upon first look I saw many articles and links that might be able to help me. I found many articles on the topic of its up and coming popularity. There were a few articles that I thought could help me Benefits of Facebook , Facebook and its affects, Facebook Meets the Virtualized Enterprise, and motives and use of facebook. After looking at all of these articles it looked like this way of searching was foolproof in finding scholarly information considering that I would have use for both of these documents. When continuing my search I found that not all of these were credible, There is no place like ... community 2.0 looked to me as if it was a college assignment that ended up on the internet. So I found that even though I used Google’s scholarly search it was still possible for someone to find spurious information. When evaluating your research on the internet Tensen states that it is very important to look over very carefully the “purpose, reputation, intended audience, reliability, appearance and timeliness” (Tensen, 2004). Without these things the value of your information and research is zero.

After taking what Tensen say into account I went on to my next search engine The Internet Public Library. When I first got onto this site I saw many ways of finding the necessary information I needed. So as Tensen say you should first make yourself familiar with the tools of the website and did by exploring what it had to offer. I found this site very easy to use and seemed helpful. You can search for information by using a ready reference, (almanacs, dictionaries, and encyclopedias) reading room, (books, magazines, and newspapers) or their subject collections. When I finally got to start my search and looked up “Facebook uses” like I did before nothing came up. So then I made my search more general and still received nothing. This seemed to be a futile effort so I abandoned my search and went to try a new site.

I then tried Alta Vista, and used its advanced search like I had done with Google. In this advanced search I was able to input some parameters that I thought would help me in finding a superior site. I made the search take the in factor of date and time relevance, considering that Facebook is a new form of social media I would want the most recent and most prevalent information. What I found though were many things explaining what to use Facebook for in a business stand point not for what it does, Using Facebook for marketing. Not only was this not the right information I was looking for but after evaluating what it was using Tensen’s methods I realized that it was not for me and the information was anything but credible. For this document it was geared toward people who own a business and want to start advertising, also the information was linked to something that appeared to be a blog of sorts. This was not something I would find useful to reference in my final project.

I ended my search for information on Facebook by using the school’s library databases. In our library there are many different types of databases so I decided to use the one geared toward communication (this helps me find articles with more relevance to my topic) Com Abstracts. In this search I used the same keywords as before “Facebook uses” and a plethora of what seemed to be applicable articles came up. I found articles like The Role of Friends' Appearance and Behavior on Evaluations of Individuals on Facebook: Are We Known by the Company We Keep?. This was a great article it had everything I was looking for it was published in 2008, it looked at Facebook and how people use it, comes from a credible source, and has a broad audience. There were two others like this that I thought were helpful, GROOMING, GOSSIP, FACEBOOK AND MYSPACE, and The Benefits of Facebook "Friends:" Social Capital and College Students' Use of Online Social Network Sites. Both of these sites talked about the history of Facebook and what it has become for people using it and how it will affect the future. This is exactly what I needed to proceed on the next part of my project, and this was the easiest way for me to find out information I found this database to be the most effective for me.

The World Wild Web can be a tricky and dangerous place if you do not know what you are doing. After going through this information gathering process and with the help from Tensen I was able to find and distinguish credible and relevant information for my purpose. Also I was able to find out what was the easiest and most efficient way of gathering data for me was.




Bibliography

Tensen, Bonnie L. (2004). Research strategies for a digital age (chapter 5). Boston: Wadsworth

Hey how did you get my information?

For today’s reading I read “Searching issues of Privacy” by Michael Zimmer, in the article I noticed some new and interesting controversies about web 2.0, search 2.0 and its components. Zimmer talks about the ultimate search engine and the possibilities that it could have on our day to day activities. When speaking about the “perfect search engine” you have to consider the two parts it needs to function perfectly. Zimmer states that not only should this perfect search engine come back with a perfect answer to your question every time but it should accomplish this task with “perfect recall”. Perfect recall is essential Zimmer says because, “web search engines must be able to identify and understand searchers’ intellectual wants, needs and desires when they perform information seeking tasks online” (Zimmer, 2008, volume 13). In order for this to occur the privacy of your information is now open to these “perfect search engines” to better obtain an understanding of what you would like to find. Your online activities are now available for public viewing (Google search yourself and see what comes up).


After reading what Zimmer had to say I had to ask myself is the cost of readily available information on the “world wild web” really worth some of my private information. Now that people have information posted on such web 2.0 programs as Facebook or wikis you can easily find out their information by doing a Google search on them. This intern may have a negative or positive effect on someone. I personally have not been affected but know of someone who has. When applying for a job last year this person was denied at the last stage of the interview process because of things that were deemed to be unfit for the position. When the person found out why they did not get the job, they ask how they found out that information because it was considered private, and the employer said that it was a matter of public information on the internet. With the advancement of search engines today we get closer to that image of a “perfect search engine”, but you now have to ask yourselves is the juice worth the squeeze?

Bibliography

Zimmer, Michael. (2008). The externalities of search 2.0: The emerging privacy threats when the drive for the perfect search engine meets web 2.0. First Monday, 13. Retrieved August 21, 2008 from http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2136/1944.

essay2

When the internet was created one of the main purposes it had was to communicate. As we have seen the internet develop we have also seen the way people communicate advance as well. There are many forms of social media today such as IRC, Usenet, and MUDs/MOOs. Out of all these types of online communication I have chosen to observe a Usenet political group from California. I chose this particular social media because I thought it would be interesting to see the views that the west had on this year’s upcoming election pertaining to John McCain.

This was not my first choice for observation; I was first looking at a Google group or Usenet group that spoke about both sides of the election process. I was excited to see how people from both sides would react to each other in an online forum. I had to change to a different Usenet group after what I had witnessed there, clearly there was a problem of cooperation. In Managing the Virtual Commons by Peter Kollock and Marc Smith they talk about this problem and how it effects the social media community. Kollock and Smith state that “The temptation is to enjoy a public good without contributing to its production, but if all reach this decision, the good is never created and all suffer”. This means that if people just leach off other people’s thoughts and ideas but never contribute their own then the group will die. This also works the other way around if only one person is doing all the contributing and not letting any other members contribute then the group will die as well. According to Kollock and Smith Ostrom states that this is called a “free-rider problem”(Ostrom 1990:6). Kollock and Smith talk about how in a Usenet it essential for contributers to take turns or else the communication will crowd up and breakdown. In this group there was barely any start up rules causing in my opinion a breakdown of communication. Once you join the group it is possible for you to come into the group and create as much noise or spam as you want. So what I witnessed happening in this newsgroup was a collapse in communication. Also on top of that anybody and everybody were bashing each other on any side of the argument. What most Usenet groups do is setup a list of boundaries to prevent this from happening. When observing this group I believe that they wanted this type of wild and free bashing community to spark debate but did not realize that it would be a free for all. After a day in this group I could not stay and moved on to a group with a similar topic but more boundaries.

The new group that I started to observe was called John McCain for president, this was a much better organized Usenet group in my opinion. This group was based in the west coast and this is what really made want to read what people though of this potential president elect. Upon first entering I was not allowed to post anything yet, there were some restrictions which I thought were great. Unlike the first Usenet group I observed I had to catchup on the weeks topic first before I could contribute any of my opinions. This was interesting in a good way to me because that meant people were not coming into this group and bombarding it with spam, it meant that in this group there was an actual form of discussion. What I observed on the first day was that there was a concern for Sarah Palin who is John McCain’s running mate. When she was first announced by McCain to be his running mate there was immediate controversy. She had many topics to talk about and what I read was, since the most media was sceptic of her she had many difficult questions to answer. What I observed was that this really made the group uneasy or at least a couple of key members. They feared this decision would stagger McCain’s progress by filling voters heads with uncertainty.

On the next day there were many issues that I found interesting and humorous. Apparently McCain did not talk about the problems of hurricane Ike very properly. People in the group thought that he could have done a better job. Someone in the group posted a link to a recording of what he had said, so I watched it to get my own opinion. What I saw was great, I thought that McCain had addressed the topic very properly, and informed the public of what he would do if there was another Katrina event. I did not know the problem here but because I was a new member and did not want to bash anybody in the group so I did not say anything. Later in the day I went back to check on the group which I thought was weird, this group was almost becoming an obsession to see what people would say. As Kollock and Smith state almost two million people around the world participate in these groups and I now understand why. When you become part of a group it makes you want to contribute and participate more often . In these types of groups it is like having a bunch of friends who are always in the mood to talk with you about topics you share a common interest in. When I went back to see if anybody posted something new I noticed a post called “Obamonopoly”. After viewing this I thought anybody who saw this would laugh,but everyone in the group was outraged. I guess humor on the west coast is running thin.

When entering the group this time I was very excited. The other day when I left the group I joined the e-mail list to get daily or weekly e-mail of what was going on in recent conversation. The e-mail that I had received was very interesting, it spoke about having a party or event to raise money for McCain’s campaign. This showed me that the members of this group did not only talk about supporting McCain they actually came up with ways to do it physically and monetarily. I received this e-mail from the same man who posted the “Obamonopoly” so I started to think that he is the leader of this Usenet group.

After observing this Usenet group over the past week I have not only learned many things about communication on the internet but I have gotten very interested in using it. I am now a member of this group and have joined two others, I check these groups constantly throughout the week. There is one thing that I wish I could have observed, the way gender plays into social media. Kollock and smith say that because the internet is blind to gender you can assume any roll you please. I have yet to see when the roll you take if man or woman really effects you in a group yet, but I hope to see how it plays out. Seeing how the internet transforms our world and the way we communicate is very interesting to me, and now that I am a member of multiple groups it is like having an inside look on what is happening next.

Bibliography

Kollock, Peter & Smith Marc. (1996). Managing the virtual commons: Cooperation and conflict in computer communities. In susan C. Herring (Ed.), Computer-mediated communications: :Linguistic, social and cross-cultural perspectives (pp. 109-128). Philadelphia: John Benjamins.

http://groups.google.com/group/californians-for-mccain?hl=en&pli=1

Last day with McCain

Today is the last day with my Google group and nobody has even mentioned the recent news of many of the large banking firms going under. I thought that this would be a major topic especially for the upcoming elections. I felt a need to post something about McCain's views on the matter but since i was a new member anything i posted would go through a comity first before it appears on the groups postings. I know this would have not taken long but I decided not to post anything. The topic today was McCain's chief of staff speaking to all district 6 republicans. I looked into this and could not even understand what people were trying to contribute. Members of the groups were posting links over other people's links so I did not know which to go to and left.

Palin still taking the heat

Today I received an e-mail from the group talking about having a party to raise money for John McCain/Palin. I thought this was a funny great idea I was invited but unfortunately I am not in California. After I went to see what my group was buzzing about and people were still concerned about how the media was treating Palin. I was not surprised with the attention she was getting good or bad. I soon left after reading these post, and hoped for tomorrow that someone would post of a topic towards McCain's statements on a new fiscal policy.

McCain under fire

In today's observation of the Usenet there was an onslaught of back fire towards McCain. Many people were talking about his past reaction to hurricane Ike, and the most popular conversations was "Obamonopoly" which I thought was a very funny post but other people were outraged. Many members of the group posted back on how things need to be changed, and what McCain' s campaign needs to do in order to fix things like this. That was all for today untill later.

John Mccain usnet

Today was special for me I actually change my topic to a more specific thing so that people were not free writing each other constantly. I moved myself to a John McCain for president Google group, which can be found at groups.google.com . When I first got on it let me chose what state i was from to get involved with people around me, but I opted to chose California because I wanted to see what the west was talking about. What I noticed today was that there was some concern about the troubles that Palin was facing in some hostile news interviews. I had to leave to I signed up for the e-mail list so I would be posted for tomorrow.