Talking about climate change #15

Getting smarter on the internet (6 minute read)

Welcome to The Turnstone. Here, I help people understand important issues such as Covid-19, climate change and conservation. I send my articles out every Sunday - if you’d like them emailed to you directly, you can sign up to my mailing list.

“Don’t share it, just because you hear it.

Don’t share it, just because you fear it.

Don't share it, if you can’t swear it.”

John Chiamama & Godswill Ezeonyeka

Last month, I got my wires crossed and wrote an extra article about vaccines. So this month, I’m publishing an extra article under the heading “talking about climate change”. However, this article is relevant to both climate change and vaccines, as it’s about evaluating information online.

The internet has made it easier than ever to find information. Unfortunately, that doesn’t mean it is easy to find good, reliable information – in fact, this may be harder than ever. I know that at times I’ve been overwhelmed by the volume of information out there and uncertain about what could be trusted.

Alpine tarn, Kahurangi National Park (image credit: Melanie Newfield)

If, like me, you grew up searching for information in books, it can be especially hard. I know that I was never taught to question my sources of information the way that I do today. But even people who grew up with the internet may not have been taught the skills that they need. And so, this month I am sharing three skills that can be used to evaluate information online.

Skill #1 – evaluating Wikipedia articles

Opinions are divided about Wikipedia. Some consider it a great source of information. Some consider it unreliable. In fact, it is both – it just depends which article you look at. The trick is to tell the good articles from those which aren’t so good.

For me, the three most important ways of evaluating a Wikipedia article are the references, the talk page and warning banners.

References

When I use Wikipedia, one of the first things I do is check the references, which are at the bottom of the article. Every statement should have a reference. For substantial articles, there may be a lot of references – for example the article on Vladimir Putin has over 700. Many of the references are linked, so you can click on them and get taken to the source. This is well worth doing, rather than relying solely on what Wikipedia says.

Talk page

In the image below, you will see I have drawn a green circle around the word “talk”. If you click on “talk”, it will take you to a page where Wikipedia editors discuss the content of the article. This information is public, so you can see everything they are saying about it. Is it controversial? Are there disagreements about editing? Does the article need work?

Among other things, the talk page contains a rating which indicates how good the article is. As an example, the page I have shown above is rated as “start class”, which means someone has made a start, but there’s still a lot of work needed. The main purpose of the rating is to inform Wikipedia editors, but it is also worth being aware of it as a reader.

Below is a link to a table which explains the ratings of Wikipedia articles. It is also worth reading the rest of the page, which talks about how the ratings are given and why they are given.

Wikipedia: Content assessment - Wikipedia (3 minute read for table, 12 minutes for whole article)

Warning banner

In the image above, you will see a box which has an orange stripe along the left-hand side and an exclamation mark. Not every article has a warning banner, but where Wikipedia editors have found problems with an article, it will be there. In this case, there are not enough references in the article, and those that have been used may not have been appropriate (for example, relying too heavily on the group’s own statements about itself).

More on evaluating Wikipedia articles

The information I’ve given here is just a small part of evaluating Wikipedia articles. For more complete information, check out the following sources.

This quick overview comes from the library of an American university. At first glance, it actually looks like a Wikipedia page – a reminder that things aren’t always what they appear to be.

Evaluating Wikipedia Articles Miami Dade College Learning Resources (2 minute read)

The following information comes from Wikipedia itself and gives a simple overview of how to evaluate an article. The formatting is a bit ugly – another reminder that we can’t always rely on appearance.

Overview of how to evaluate an article (wikimedia.org) (4 minute read)

Here’s a longer, and better formatted, version of the guide from Wikipedia.

Evaluating Wikipedia brochure.pdf (wikimedia.org) (7 minute read)

If you prefer your information in video form, here’s a video from a Wikipedia editor on how to evaluate Wikipedia articles.

how to evaluate a Wikipedia article - YouTube (8 minute video)

Skill #2 – lateral reading

Lateral reading is the practice of searching for information about websites at the same time as you are looking at those websites. It is a strategy used by professional fact checkers, but the basics can be applied by anyone.

When they visit an unknown website, professional fact checkers do a series of searches to evaluate the reliability of that website. One of the first searches many of them do is see what Wikipedia says about the website or organisation – which is one reason I’ve included the information about evaluating Wikipedia articles first.

Sometimes there isn’t much information available about the website, but there may be information on the organisations or individuals who support it. It is well worth spending the time doing a little digging.

Here are some resources about lateral reading, starting with the basics and ending up with a full course on fact checking.

Expand your view with lateral reading — News Literacy Project (2 minute read)

Sort Fact from Fiction Online with Lateral Reading - YouTube (4 minute video)

Here is an overview of the SIFT method, which uses lateral reading to better evaluate claims and sources online. SIFT stands for:

• Stop

• Investigate the source

• Find better coverage

• Trace claims, quotes and media to the original context

SIFT (The Four Moves) | Mike Caulfield (6 minute read)

I have shared the following two sites before, but they are worth sharing again because the information is excellent.

SIFT - The Four Moves (4 videos, 12 minutes in total)

For a more in-depth look, the following site, from digital literacy expert Mike Caulfield, has a free course with a range of resources, based on SIFT.

Check, Please! Starter Course (notion.site) (5 lessons, each around 30 minutes)

Skill #3 – apply the CRAAP test

CRAAP is an acronym to help you remember factors to take into account when looking at sources. It stands for:

• Currency

• Relevance

• Authority

• Accuracy

• Purpose

The CRAAP test doesn’t go into as much depth on how to evaluate a source, which is why I’ve put the skills of evaluating Wikipedia articles and lateral reading first. But the CRAAP test pulls everything together and tells you the kinds of questions to ask. Although both of the resources below are aimed at University Students, they give a good overview of what you should be thinking about when you look at a source of information.

Ask CRAAP Questions - determine credibility and relevance (Illinois State University) (2 minute read)

Evaluation Tests: CRAAP Test - Edith Cowan University (2 minute read, 3 minute video)

This month’s poem

This month’s poem isn’t exactly a poem – it’s a jingle aimed at reminding people not to share false information about Covid-19. However, it is just as relevant to climate change. The jingle was written by two young Nigerians in response to the false information circulating about Covid-19. The following website gives you more information about them, but unfortunately I haven’t been able to find the video version of the jingle they made.

Poetry takes on centre stage to dispel mis- and dis-information on COVID-19 | UNESCO

The Turnstone is free, but if you would like to support my work with a monthly or annual subscription, click the “Subscribe now” button below for options.

If you would like to support The Turnstone with a one-off contribution, click the “Buy me a coffee” button below.