1. Holdstein & Aquiline, Chapter 5 Online Sources
Who Says?
Holdstein & Aquiline, Chapter 5
Online Sources

2. Digital research, pros & cons
Have Wikipedia and Google “in some ways been a detriment to our intellectual lives?” (p. 53). Is Carr correct? [Note Jet Ski misspelled, p. vii, 55, 56, 63]
But also a “boon”: How so?
More info, but you have to be better at evaluating it
You need to understand the older traditions of scholarly research

3. Evaluating sources
Your ethos depends on how well you vetted your sources, as well as used them appropriately and honestly
Knowing which sources are reliable has gotten more difficult. Why?
Web content usually not edited, not filtered [Clay Shirky said we used to filter, then publish, now we publish, then filter]
Web content can turn up in Google because it was sponsored/paid for [but you essentially cannot “game” the system as they say on p. 57]
Almost everything printed had been reviewed by editors, other scholars

4. How to use Google and Wikipedia
Know the Boolean terms AND, OR, NOT
Try Google Scholar and Google Books]
Limit search to .edu, .org, .gov [Settings->Advanced Search or site:.edu]
Wikipedia:
Useful to get started—generally do not use it or any tertiary source in a Works Cited list [Recall from video in our library Piktochart that uncredited sources lack ethos]
Entries usually do have a bibliography at the end that you can check

5. Appropriate sources What types of sources fit your essay assignment?
Do you need quantitative sources (data), qualitative (opinions, observations, focus groups, quotes) or both? Often it’s both
Know how to recognize scholarly sources: peer-reviewed, written for other scholars/discourse community, use citations, have a works cited list, few ads, black-and-white layouts vs. popular sources
Pre-read: look at the table of contents, headings, abstracts

6. Evaluating sources
This works for all, but is more important for Web. Note they devised CARS:
Credibility: Is the author a faculty member? What credentials/degrees do they have? Could they be biased? Is the publisher credible? [note “fake” journals we will look at later] If a website, is it .edu or .gov [.org can be more problematic. Why?]
Accuracy: Peer-reviewing should assure that it is [but the fake journals fake this process]. If it’s current, it’s more likely to be accurate i.e. up-to-date. Older work is acceptable but usually to provide context.
Reasonable: Unbiased, balanced
Support(ed): There are references/works cited. Has it been cited by others [Google Scholar shows this and most online journals do after the references]. However, many useful articles do not get cited a lot.
La Salle version of this is CARDS: Credibility, Accuracy, Relevance, Dates, Sources.