Needing Credible Sources in the New Data World

Thursday, 09. 17. 2009  –  Category: Dial611

As I mentioned in my previous two articles on smartphones, more and more data is becoming easier to access wirelessly.  And while access to this information is great, it does come with some inherent dangers to our lifestyle.  But beyond just personal dangers, there already is and will continue to be a concern for credibility in this new data world.

Wave one of the digital credibility issue has come with the Internet and e-mail.  There was a tremendous amount of content suddenly available at our fingertips, with news and research that once took days or months to obtain now only a search away.  However, the credibility of the sources behind the content were suspicious at best, as anonymous opinions and flat out false content was mixed with real news

Slowly, safeguards began to come into place.  Sites like Snopes.com proved themselves capable of policing content by earning a reputation for reliability.  Traditional news companies like CNN and the Wall Street Journal developed online portals that offered content directly and on a truly real-time basis.

Still, the credibility game is far from over, as seemingly credible sites continue to ward off false information.  The problem more recently comes as some news and information sites get pulled into false information by the fear of not providing instantly breaking news to their readers.  The time that reporters used to have to verify stories between newspaper runs is gone.  Posts can be instant and therefore breaking a story happens instantly.

But how much verification can be done in seconds?  The answer is not much.  The most that can be done now is a phone call or two, or more realistically a quick Google search to confirm.  The result is that often news stories are raw at the outset and evolve over a period, with many of the key details changing quickly.

Some sites are beginning to address this verification issue.  Wikipedia, a site known for both  having its users maliciously editing content and also strongly self-policing the information, announced in August that it would be changing its rules for editing entries. Updates made to entries will now require verification by a Wikipedia volunteer.  The reason?  There is a need bring additional credibility to their site by minimizing the risk of disseminating false information.

But credible sources can do more than just tell us if something is true.  They can also help us filter down content and prioritize its importance to us.  As more content becomes available, most of us become less and less likely to aggregate the data ourselves.  Instead, we will look to reliable locations to do this for us.  Right now, those outlets are particular media outlets (print, television, websites).  However, on a mobile platform that can also include applications and the mobile operator’s services as well.

We see examples already of mobile applications serving as news and information delivery.  Texting is the most common one, with SMS messaging now driving breaking news, emergency alerts and discounts at your favorite businesses.  But as the smartphone experience becomes a more unified experience, we could see some of these applications and platforms merging.  As it does, however, the concern will return to issue of the data’s credibility and what sources you can really trust.

Read Part I: What Happens When All Data is Mobile

Read Part II:  The Danger of Being Too Connected

David Fleming works for CornerWorld Corporation, parent company of Dial611.

Tags: aggregators, cell phone, CNN, credibility, data, David Fleming, smartphone, snopes.com, texting, verification, Wall Street Journal