From: Tom Tibor
Date: Wed Jul 9, 2003 1:18:38 PM America/New_York
To: Evan Coyne Maloney
Subject: RE: The Great Media Meltdown

Evan,

I view online information sources as “double-edged swords,” in this sense:

- On the positive side, they enable one-to-one, one-to-many, and many-to-many global communication, which allows for incredibly rapid dissemination of useful information.

- Unfortunately, they also enable the incredibly rapid dissemination of lies, distortions, disinformation, misinformation, rumor, and the worst kinds of propaganda. The speed of dissemination occurs much faster than any attempt to monitor the accuracy of the information.

A key issue is how to determine the credibility of online sources. For all of their faults, established news outlets such as the Washington Post, NY Times, Reuters, BBC and so on, simply have more credibility than many online sources, at least until recently.

A related issue is to stem the tide of hate propaganda enabled by the Internet. In many Third World nations, where literacy rates are low, people believe whatever they see or hear on the Internet. Just because it’s “high-tech,” they believe it must be true. For example, New York Times commentator, Thomas Friedman, in his travels throughout the Middle East and East Asia, noted how quickly the “I hate you virus” can be spread using the Internet.

Tom Tibor

Tom,

You are absolutely right in your assessment of the pros and cons of online reporting. Just as in the print world, you have The New York Times and The Wall Street Journal, you also have people who can easily produce flyers or pamphlets that any concerned citizen—or crackpot—can hand out on any street corner in the world. Sometimes, the 95 Theses will be produced, sometimes it’ll be recruiting propaganda for some neo-Nazi organization.

In all these cases, the medium is the same (print on paper). But the medium just carries the message, and the message itself must be evaluated independently of the medium. Each medium has its own unique properties; in the case of the Internet, it is suited for instant, worldwide dissemination, and that immediacy carries risks as you note.

The way around the problem you cite is trust. Just as people trust established entities more than the corner crackpot, people are beginning to develop trust in some online sources, while others are quite easily debunked. That’s where the interconnected nature of the Internet is a benefit. Eventually, some outlets will become more trusted than others, and people will gravitate towards those outlets.

My contention is, once an outlet has gained that trust, abuse of that trust will be more easily exposed thanks to the Internet.

Thanks for writing,
Evan

Note: 
In a subsequent e-mail, Tom recommended the book Smart Mobs, which discusses “reputation networks” as a way to evaluate the trustworthiness of entities in continually changing networks.