Public Speaking Handbook

sources of supporting Material 8.1 157

EVALUATING INTERNET RESOURCES Although the Web was founded on
the principle of free speech, the lack of legal, financial, or editorial restrictions on
what is published on the Web presents both a logistical and an ethical challenge
to researchers.
As you begin to explore the sites that you discover, you need to evaluate
them according to a consistent standard. The six criteria in Table 8.1 can serve
as such a standard.^2 The first four criteria can serve as guides to evaluating any
resource, regardless of whether it is a Web site, a print document, or even infor-
mation that you obtain in an interview.
No discussion of evaluating Internet resources would be complete with
mentioning Wikipedia, the resource that often appears as the first hit from a Web
search. Wikipedia can be useful, especially for general information about current
events and new technology that may not find its way into print resources for

Table 8.1 six Criteria for evaluating internet resources

Criterion Applying the Criterion Drawing Conclusions

Accountability: Who is

responsible for the site?

• The individual or organization responsible for the site may
  be clear from the title of the site and/or its URL.


• See whether the site is signed.


• Follow links or search the author’s name to determine the
  author’s expertise and authority.


• If the site is unsigned, search for a sponsoring organiza-
  tion. Follow links, search the organization’s name, or
  consider the domain to determine the reputability.
  
  
  • If you cannot identify or verify the
    author or sponsor, be wary of
    the site.
  
  
  
  

Accuracy: Is the

information correct?

• Consider whether the author or sponsor is a credible
  authority.


• Assess the care with which the site has been written.


• Conduct additional research into the information you find
  on the site.
  
  
  • If the author or sponsor is a cred-
    ible authority, the information is
    more likely to be accurate.
  
  
  • A site should be relatively free of
    writing errors.
  
  
  • You may be able to verify or refute
    the information by consulting
    another resource.
    Objectivity: Is the site
    free of bias?
  
  
  
  


• Consider the interests, philosophical or political biases,
  and source of financial support of the author and/or
  sponsor of the site.


• Does the site include advertisements that might influence
  its content?


• The more objective the author
  and sponsor of the site are, the
  more credible their information
  may be.

Timeliness: Is the site

current?

• Look at the bottom of the site for a statement telling
  when the site was posted and when it was last updated.


• If you cannot find a date on the site, click on Page Info
  (from the Tools menu at the top of your browser screen)
  to find a “Last Modified” date.


• Enter the title of the site in a search engine. The resulting
  information should include a date.
  
  
  • In general, when you are con-
    cerned with factual data, the
    more recent, the better.
  
  
  
  

Usability: Do the layout

and design of the site

facilitate its use?

• Does the site load fairly quickly?


• Is a fee required to gain access to any of the information
  on the site?
  
  
  • Balance graphics and any fees
    against practical efficiency.
  
  
  
  

Diversity: Is the site

inclusive?

• Do language and graphics reflect and respect differences
  in gender, ethnicity, race, and sexual orientation?


• Do interactive forums invite divergent perspectives?


• Is the site friendly to people with disabilities (e.g., does it
  offer a large-print or video option)?
  
  
  • A site should be free of bias,
    representative of diverse perspec-
    tives, and accessible by people
    with disabilities.
  
  
  
  

Copyrighted by pearson education, Upper saddle river, nJ