Källkritik för Internet Källkritik för Internet

knowledge, of what consequence are the
large amount of information on the Net and
the rapid conveyance of this information?
• What kinds of errors and pitfalls does journalism
encounter on the Net?
• Is it best to put your primary trust in old,
established authorities?
• How should we approach all of the alternative
sources available? How can we see
through extremist elements’ propaganda
on the Net?
• What kinds of information can we find on
the Net that are otherwise difficult to
access?
• Aren’t there, after all, ”hard” facts we can
trust?
• What can we learn from various databases?
What is it we’re not allowed to know? In
what respect must we be careful when
drawing conclusions?
• In practice, how can we proceed when seeking
information on a certain subject?
Source analysis and its expansion
Our point of departure is the method of sour-
ce analysis. It can be summarised in terms of
four criteria: time, dependence, authenticity
and bias.
Time
In traditional source analysis, the time criterion
meant that human forgetfulness must be
taken into account. The more time elapsed
after an event, the less reliable the witnesses
reporting on the event. On the Internet, this
problem is somewhat different; it is mostly a
question of when the website was last updated.
If information is not updated regularly, the
presented facts can become obsolete and perhaps
incorrect. It is, therefore, important to
check when the website in question was last
updated.
Dependence
Within both journalism and history research,
it is important to know whether different
sources are interdependent. If two sources are
independent, the credibility of assertions
common to both of them increases. On the
other hand, if the sources are dependent on
one another, credibility is diminished.
The most common form of dependence on
the Internet is handover, i.e. information is
derived in several steps. A person setting up a
website often takes information from another
website, which in turn has perhaps been informed
by yet another website. Things can
have changed en route – figures rounded up or
down, language altered. In this way, the meaning
of the presentation can be different from
the original. The following rule should, therefore,
be adhered to: if possible, go back to the
original source – the primary source. Secondhand
information – from secondary sources –
or thirdhand information – from tertiary sources
– might be incomplete or corrupted.
Another rule is to check against an independent
source. If, for example, a person
claims the title of Professor on his/her website,
check the university in question to see if
the person is mentioned there and by what title.
Or check a library catalogue for possible
books written by the person.
Authenticity
It is important to know whether a source is
actually what it claims to be. Various types of
falsifications have always occurred, and
uncovering them belongs to the classic repertoire
of source analysis. Previously, such falsifications
were relatively easy to reveal. With a
little precision and cleverness, we could discover
whether text had been erased, a photograph
retouched or whether an alleged antique
object was a reproduction. But when
information is presented electronically, it is
143