Information on Blogs ☀
Earlier this week, in a response to sds, azspot used the term “un-peer reviewed web pages” as part of the title. I can’t say that I have ever heard of peer reviewed websites, though I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that they are out there. After all, it is a staple of the academic community that one’s journal articles are peer reviewed, particularly when it comes to science.
This raised a question for me, though, in that azspot’s references to global warming claims are often on blogspot or other blogging websites. (I should note that I am using azspot only as an example here, not to pick on him. Or her. Whatever the case may be.) Can blogs be peer reviewed? Would it make a difference if they were?
I tend to distrust information I see on blogs (as opposed to, say, on news organization websites) because I assume most bloggers are like myself: professionally unqualified to speak about most of the subjects they talk about, and politically or otherwise biased toward certain viewpoints.
Caveat emptor.
A “blog” is no different than a book or documentary video. Granted, the open nature of the media means there will be an abundance of rubbish, but certainly, the other mediums are by no means immune.
My metrics for assessing the quality of a blog are similar to how I peruse a book.
- Author credibility. What exactly are the author’s credentials? Self-schooled or endowed with a pedigree of university degree? Real-life experience or front-line witness? How applicable is it to the topic at hand? How long has the author studied in this realm? What other works on the subject has he published?
- Author endorsements. Who is plugging the author? The content of their praiseworthy blurb is unimportant; rather, their biography, profile and past written record are paramount. Likewise, who are this writer’s detractors (here you will have to scan external sources)? Now, just because X is supportive and X is suspect, does not instantly denote the same status for the author. Or vice versa.
- Author integrity. What is the author’s motivation for sharing his written words? What he is advocating for or protesting against? Is her quest merely informative, utilitarian instructive or passionately imperative? What does the author wish for the reader to walk away with? Has the author been shown to be deceitful? How does the author handle challenges to claims he’s errored in his reporting?
- Author sources. Who or what does the author cite in presenting evidence? In any book I pick up, I always turn to the bibliography section and/or footnotes first. What books and writers influenced him? Who does the author rely on? I will actually key those book titles into Amazon or Google. Consider that this is not always done in a “positive” manner. It could well be “neutral” or even “negative”, to tear apart a previous hitherto accepted treatise.
Now, applying this criteria to a blog means I employ the following “checklist”:
- Check the author. First stop is the /about page for an unfamiliar blog (or website). Even pseudo-anonymous blog proprietors leave a trail of internet bits. Plain vanilla Google search is the obvious choice for many but I prefer a more filtered search — using Google Custom Search, where you can narrow your search domains to only specific domains — say, those sites you find to be credible (including those offering viewpoints you disagree with). Your RSS reader too — the main reason I use Google Reader is for the search functionality.
- Blog relations. Where do the hyperlinks go? What is on the blogroll? Who is linking there? Most search engines offer some form of a linkto: search capability. Or again, your RSS reader can clue you in to who’s extolling who, or who’s berating who.
Yes, the sheer volume of published material in the internet realm does make the exercise of distinguishing quality tougher. But there really is no difference in applying the criteria I list above to text I read in my web browser v. printed pages in hardcover (or softcover) books. For all the sins of hucksters on the interwebs, I believe hardcopy volumes from respectable publishers to be just as prone to fallacy.
