In the late 90s, as the promise of the world wide web (isn’t it funny that the abbreviation has more syllables than the words) had yet to reach most U.S. households, the media was saturated with promises of an internet paradise. These reports and articles included glowing visions of how access to information through our computers would broaden communication making our lives more efficient, rewarding, and effortless. Events have not quite turned out as envisioned. 

Many saw the future of the internet as a place for individuals to make thoughtful exchanges of information as found in many of the early web logs (blogs). Instead, social media sites like Facebook and TikTok exchanged personal freedom for ease of access and presented us with superficial messages while providing or selling personal information to the highest bidder. This ease of access has also allowed poorly researched or purposely misleading information onto a platform for dissemination. It is important to note that most social networking sites work on algorithms that favor popularity and not accuracy. 

These rose-colored glass predictions did not foresee how this public exchange of information would lead to an increase in the number of people who find themselves pulled into believing unconfirmed and erroneous ideas. Today the flat earth conspiracy is larger than at any time in the past, largely due to the ease of sharing information whether it is factual or not. And the flat-earthers are not alone as conspiracy theories touch almost every facet of life from health to politics to entertainment. How did things go so wrong? 

Much of it can be attributed to human nature. Take for example the Dunning-Kruger effect, a well-studied phenomenon where novices overestimate their knowledge and experts underestimate what they know. Combine this with the illusion of understanding, where our brains seek to fill gaps of understanding with any information available even if it is not accurate, and the recipe for drawing poor conclusions is baked in. 

It doesn’t have to be this way. There are plenty of resources and people out there who can help us sift through the information to separate the facts from the deceit. An appropriate system for checking a source of information for accuracy involves using the SIFT method. 

SIFT is a helpful acronym for initially checking source credibility. “S” stands for stop or pause, what do you know about this source or website reputation? If the information provokes a strong response slow down, we tend to react quickly with less thought to things that arouse strong feelings. “I” stands for investigation; what is the creator’s expertise or agenda? “F” is for finding trusted sources by comparing the information across sources to find a consensus. Finally, “T” is for tracing the claims, quotes, and media back to the original source. 

However, none of this guidance is useful if we are not willing to change what we believe we know given new good information. No one wants to be told they are wrong, especially publicly. All these tools are only going to be effective in so far as we actually are seeking the truth. Unfortunately, it seems most folks are not truth seekers by nature and are more motivated by things that are socially advantageous for us because that is what our group believes. 

If you would like more details or some help practicing your truth-seeking skills, the staff at the Ignacio Community Library would love to be of service. Our librarians are highly educated and trained and oversee a motivated staff of assistants who can help you with answering difficult questions and finding the good information.