Picture this scenario:
Royalty-free picture: https://pixabay.com/en/workplace-team-business-meeting-1245776/
You're talking with a group of people, when somebody says, "I crossed the Mississippi River a couple weeks ago. You know, I was expecting it to be huge and impressive, right? But it really wasn't even that wide—it only took a minute to cross the old iron bridge, and I was on land again. Isn't the Mississippi supposed to be the third-longest river in the world?"
"Wait, I thought it was the fourth-longest."
"I'm pretty sure I learned that it was third-longest."
"Ok, let's look it up. How long is the Mississippi, anyway?"
"How do you spell 'Mississippi' again?..."
And people pull out their phones and Google "Mississippi river length." But maybe you shouldn't be so quick to rely on Google for your facts!
_________________
In preparation for a lecture this semester, I needed to find the length of the Mississippi River (to illustrate a psychological point. It's less weird than it sounds...). The first thing I did was the same thing the people in the above scenario did: I searched it on Google.
But I didn't get this far in my schooling without being curious (and a nerd!). So I went to the first link, which was the Wikipedia page, and saw the same number: 2,320 miles.
So Google and Wikipedia both told me the same thing; the length must therefore be 2,320 miles. But I had also opened the link for Encyclopedia Britannica in a new tab, so I checked that entry:
Wait a minute...which is it? Is it 2,320 miles or 2,340?
I went back to Wikipedia, and checked the source (citation 11) for their claim of 2,320 miles.
Wikipedia is usually pretty trustworthy (and despite what some have claimed, its doom isn't actually impending), so I'm inclined to go with the "2,320" figure.
Oh, the source for the 2,320-mile figure is the U.S. Geological Survey. I'm more inclined to believe U.S. government scientists over a British encyclopedia when it comes to the length of an American river. The source is an archived version of the page, so this is a trustworthy source that can't be changed on a whim:
WHAT?!?! It clearly says 2,340!!! How did somebody type the wrong number into Wikipedia?! Right there, in black and white, the source says "2,340 miles." It's literally as simple as copying a 4-digit number!
Doesn't anybody have any attention to detail?! Doesn't anybody take pride in their work?!
Sigh...now I have to change my PowerPoint. But I better do some further checking before I write down the number, just to make sure that the "2,340" figure isn't also messed up!
_________________
There's a lesson here. First, Wikipedia is clearly not always trustworthy. You know how your teachers always tell you never to cite Wikipedia? This experience, along with stories like this one, clearly illustrates why. If you want to ensure accuracy, you may not want to simply rely on the first thing that Google spits out...
Unlike 30 years ago, there is now more information at our fingertips than we could possibly hope to check! All in all, this is probably a good thing, as it democratizes information and makes us less reliant on a few sources that may have an agenda, or on our own unreliable memories.
However, the power of information—including sensitive personal information—makes us vulnerable. As with any innovation, the free flow of information can be a double-edged sword.
One consequence is that, in the face of an overwhelming cascade of knowledge, our critical thinking faculties will begin to shut down. Instead of asking ourselves, "Is this really true? Based on what evidence?" we will take the path of least resistance and simply say "Google says X, and Google is always right."
Humans are often described as cognitive misers; given that we only have a limited amount of time, energy, and brainpower, it makes sense that we would not carefully scrutinize everything.
Finding the truth is difficult. Swallowing a lie is easy. Also, Brandolini's Law.
But if you want the truth—if you really want the truth—gear up! The road ahead is hard, sometimes boring, and usually thankless (my students probably don't care whether it's 2,320 miles, 2,340 miles, 2,552 miles, or something else). And when you do find the truth, you'll probably discover that it's more complicated and nuanced than you expected.
For example, Wikipedia is not always as untrustworthy as I implied above:
Oh, and in case you're curious, there's debate over whether the Nile or the Amazon is the longest river in the world, due to the uncertainty I referenced earlier in measuring the length of a river. The Missouri-Mississippi River system is the fourth-longest in the world, behind the Nile, the Amazon, and the Yangtze. Wikipedia's list of the world's longest rivers also does a good job of summarizing this uncertainty.
But how many people actually read that stuff, rather than just skipping to the table and saying, "Ah, the Amazon River is the longest in the world!"
And yes, I double-checked: this quote actually is from French writer André Gide...
***
***
Wondering about the social media usage of actual college students?
No comments:
Post a Comment