Evaluating Web Resources
There is a tremendous amount of information available on the World Wide Web, but just how reliable is that information? Consider the following:
· Print material typically goes through a review process in which fact-checkers, editors, and/or publishers verify the information presented in an article.
· Articles appearing on the Web can be written by anyone and posted without any type of verification.
This means you must evaluate web sources for accuracy and reliability. The following pages will discuss criteria for evaluating web sites in four categories: Authority, Accuracy, Currency and Objectivity.
Authority: “An accepted source of expert information or advice.”[1] When evaluating the reliability of web resources, authority can be examined on three levels: a) the author, b) the publisher and c) the sponsor:
a) Author: You are trying to determine if the author is an expert or a reputable source of information.
Typically, the author’s name will be
listed near the top of the screen. If no author is listed, look for a copyright
statement (usually at the bottom of the screen) indicating who is taking
responsibility for the material. The copyright statement may contain the name
of the publisher or sponsor.
Are the author’s qualifications
listed? Do the qualifications suggest that the author is an expert in the
subject? Is there a way to contact the author to ask for more information? If
there is no author, is it clear who is taking responsibility for the article?
b) Publisher: The publisher of a page is the person or persons who provide space on their server to store the information and make it accessible on the Internet. Keep in mind that some entities, such as schools, allow people to post personal web sites that are not officially associated with the publisher.
Look at the top of the page for the
web site name or in the margins for an ‘About’ link. Try to determine if it is
a personal web site or blog (see Table 1). In addition, you should verify that
the URL (see Tables 2 and 3) matches the site name. For example, if you
are looking at a web page with “Newsweek” as the title, you would not expect
the URL to be www.joe.com...
Is it clear who publishes the page? Is
there a page describing the publisher’s purpose? Is there a way of verifying
the legitimacy of the page’s publisher? That is, is there a phone number or
postal address (An e-mail address is not enough)? Is the publisher considered
an expert in the subject? Is it a personal web page or blog?
c) Sponsor: In many cases, the
sponsor and the publisher are the same, but in some instances the publisher may
rely on outside sources to help fund the production of the 
site. Those sponsors
may give you more perspective on the site’s purpose and objectivity (see the
section on objectivity).
If the sponsor is different from the
publisher, they may be listed under the title of the web site or at the bottom
of the site’s home page. You can also look for an ‘About’ link which may give
you more information.
Is it clear who sponsors the page? Is
there a page describing the sponsor’s purpose? Is there a way of verifying the
legitimacy of the page’s sponsor? That is, is there a phone number or postal
address (An e-mail address is not enough)? Is the sponsor considered an expert
in the subject?
Accuracy: In a state of conforming to fact[2]. Often an article will list facts or refer to studies. You will need to determine if those facts or studies are legitimate and accurate.
In the body of the article look for
quotes, charts, tables, facts, figures, or references to research projects or
studies. If these are included, the sources of that information should be
included as well. Be sure to verify the sources! Just because someone cites a
source, doesn’t mean the source is reputable, accurate, or even exists. Also,
look for mistakes in spelling and grammar.
Are sources clearly listed so they can
be verified? Is the information free of grammatical, spelling, and other
typographical errors? If there are charts or graphs, are they clearly labeled
and easy to read? Is the information consistent, or are there contradictions?
Can you verify the sources that have been cited?
Objectivity: The state of being uninfluenced by emotion or opinion.[3]
Take into account that every article, audio or video contains bias. Part of evaluating bias will take place when you evaluate the author or publisher of the article and sponsor of the site. But there are a few more things you can look for:
Look in the margins of the page and
examine the advertising or supporting links provided. In the body, look for
statements of opinion with (or without) supporting facts, or statements of fact
with (or without) sources clearly listed.
Is the information free of advertising?
If there is advertising, is it clearly differentiated from the information
content? Does the site/author appear to be bias? Does the site/author express
undocumented opinions or facts?
Currency: “The fact or quality of [belonging to the present time,] being prevalent, or generally reported and accepted”[4] Articles with very old dates may have irrelevant or inaccurate information. But keep in mind that while some older articles may have just been forgotten, some may have been left for historical record keeping.
Dates for when the article was
written, posted, and last updated. Also go to the site’s home page and look for
the date that the site was last updated. Try some of the links posted on the
site to see if they are still valid.
Are the following dates available: Date
the page was written? Date the page was first placed on the Web? Date the page
was last revised? If information is presented in charts, graphs, or tables is
it stated when the data was gathered? Are the links reliable, or are there
references to sites that have moved or are no longer available.
Table 1: Personal Web Pages and Blogs
|
It’s more likely that the content on these types of pages is someone’s opinion and has not been reviewed for accuracy. o Blogs are usually labeled as such somewhere near the top of the window. o Personal web pages can be a little more difficult to identify but look for someone’s name or initials. Below are some examples of personal URLs: |
|
|
URL |
Notes |
|
/users/ indicates a personal site |
|
|
the tilde (~) indicates a personal site |
|
|
home indicates a personal site |
|
Table 2: Common Domain Names
Domain |
Type |
Examples |
Restricted* |
Notes |
|
.com |
Commercial |
Businesses, magazines, newspapers, etc… |
No |
· Businesses may be trying to sell merchandise, while advertisers may influence the material presented. |
|
.biz |
Business |
Businesses |
Yes |
· Businesses may be trying to sell merchandise. |
|
.org |
Non-profit |
Churches, Charities, Political organizations |
No |
· May be trying to persuade readers. |
|
.edu |
Educational Facility |
Schools, Colleges, Universities |
Yes |
· May be anything from personal web pages to legitimate research results. · Schools typically allow students and professors to post personal web sites. |
|
.gov |
Government Organization |
FBI, Federal Trade Commission |
Yes |
· Generally reliable, may be out of date. · Government sites in other countries will end in a country code instead of .gov (.ca = Canada, .de = Germany ) www.iana.org/cctld/cctld-whois.htm. |
|
.int |
organizations established by international treaties |
NATO, United Nations, European Space Agency |
Yes |
· May provide perspective from many different points of view or may be trying to persuade readers |
|
.net |
Computer Network |
Any network at any facility |
No |
· Typically used by Internet Service Providers. |
* An unrestricted domain means anyone can obtain a web address under that domain. For example, anyone can obtain a .org domain so they may not represent an actual non-profit organization. Restricted domains require entities to apply with accredited registrars and provide documentation on the legitimacy of the entity and purpose of the site.