Evaluating Web Resources

So it turns out my dad’s advice is true. “You can’t believe everything you read,” he said to me when I was a child. Although he made this statement long before the World Wide Web was around, this is an especially true concept now that the Internet is such a big part of most peoples’ daily lives.

In the previous assignment, I stated that Internet users must learn to take the good with the bad. In the process, however, Web surfers can take precautions to protect themselves from all of the negative aspects the online world has to offer.

Because the Internet is a place where anyone can publish information, it is important for Internet users to have the capacity to sift out the unreliable stuff. People should make it a habit to use certain criteria when viewing Web pages in order to determine if the information is trustworthy or not. When viewing content on the Web, people should take into consideration the content, authority and presentation of the site.

CONTENT:

Chuck Anesi’s website titled "The Titanic Casualty Figures" appears to be complete and thoroughly researched. It was created in 1997, but this kind of information does not change with time. The site was last updated in 2006. Anesi cites relative and legitimate sources, such as The Encyclopedia Titanica, along with external links that work properly. It seems that the intended audience for this site would be for anyone interested in the history of the Titanic. The site presents what seems to be accurate information about who survived the disaster, and pushes the idea that the lower-class passengers on the ship were more likely to survive. It also stresses how men were much less likely to survive than women, obviously because women and children were allowed to escape on the lifeboats first.

AUTHORITY:

Chuck Anesi created this page. As far as I can tell from browsing around on his website, he is just a person who “puts strange information” on his website. There is an e-mail address that he can be reached at as well as three different blogs, but I question how often he checks his e-mail considering his page hasn’t been updated in several years. The site does not state that it is affiliated with any other organization. This seems to be a personal web page that a history buff created.

PRESENTATION:

The design of the site is outdated, but it looks professional for something that was created 10 or more years ago. The spelling, grammar and punctuation are pretty good, although I did notice a couple of typos. The over-all writing style is comprehensive and topic-appropriate. The navigation is pretty simple and easy to use, and the headings on the different pages are appropriate. The graphs on the site are very informative, and he cites the source where they came from.

If I were searching for information on the Internet about Titanic casualty rates, I would probably trust the information on this site. Although the presentation is less than impressive, the content seems legitimate.  Chuck Anesi doesn’t claim to be an expert of any kind, but he appears to have done adequate research on this topic and cites where his research came from.