Mod 2.1 Sourcing Information on the Web
Warnick lays out five criteria cited by lay users as indexes of Web site credibility. (Table 1.)
Which of these criteria do you feel you have typically relied upon to determine the reliability of a site in the past? Why?
"TABLE 1: Criteria Cited by Lay Users as Indexes of Web Site Credibility
Criterion Percentage
1. Being able to trust the information on a site 80
2. Being able to easily navigate and find what you want 80
3. Being able to easily identify sources of information on the site 65
4. Knowing that the site is updated frequently with new information 65
5. Being able to find out important facts about the site 50
6. Knowing who owns the site 32" (Warnick 2004)
In the past I have mainly relied on site functionality/usability, quality/interesting content, limited advertising or flashing gimmicks. But since starting the degree I am more inclined to investigate authorship, contact options, currency, quality links, quality of information, and the previously mentioned criteria. I think many of the criteria issues/expectations are addressed in a matter of seconds through visual quick scanning, we know what we want, and it depends on the type of website.
I mainly use Bloglines as an RSS feed from a variety of sites including:
They are easy to access, scan, and retrieve relative and interesting information that is mostly current and at times important. For common news/documentaries I prefer listening to the ABC radio while I'm on the net, tuning in when its interesting.
Do you agree with Warnick's suggestion that the emphasis on the author might be replaced by one based upon "skillful design, image quality, usability, information structure, comprehensiveness, absence of self-interest, [and] usefulness"?
I think this is especially true, users are basically bamboozled by website creativity and craftiness, by technology, rather than authorship. For instance my main website has had the 'About Us' section "Under Construction" since inception, but that has not stopped those interested in the content. Having an email address clearly visible that I reply to diligently/daily makes up for the inadequacy of authorship, people then trust and make payments. However the site went down once and I received an email at another address suggesting that the site and content was a potential scam.
|
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment