Abstract
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 113-119 |
| Number of pages | 7 |
| Journal | ICES, Journal for Information, Communication and Ethics in Society |
| Publication status | Published - 2005 |
Fingerprint
Cite this
}
Expert information for non-experts : Inherent and contextual risks of misinformation. / Vedder, A.H.
In: ICES, Journal for Information, Communication and Ethics in Society, 2005, p. 113-119.Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Scientific › peer-review
TY - JOUR
T1 - Expert information for non-experts
T2 - Inherent and contextual risks of misinformation
AU - Vedder, A.H.
N1 - This article can be purchased online. Pagination: 7
PY - 2005
Y1 - 2005
N2 - One of the most significant aspects of Internet, in comparison with other sources of information, such as libraries, books, journals, television, radio etcetera, is that it makes expert knowledge much more accessible to non-experts than the other traditional sources. This phenomenon has often been applauded for its democratizing effects. Unfortunately, there is also a disadvantage. Expert information that was originally intended for a specific group of people ¿ and not in any way processed or adapted to make it fit for a broader audience ¿ can easily be misunderstood and misinterpreted by non-experts and, when used as a basis for decisions, lead to unhappy consequences. Can these risks be diminished without limiting the informational freedoms of the information providers and without imposing paternalistic measures regarding the receivers of the information?
AB - One of the most significant aspects of Internet, in comparison with other sources of information, such as libraries, books, journals, television, radio etcetera, is that it makes expert knowledge much more accessible to non-experts than the other traditional sources. This phenomenon has often been applauded for its democratizing effects. Unfortunately, there is also a disadvantage. Expert information that was originally intended for a specific group of people ¿ and not in any way processed or adapted to make it fit for a broader audience ¿ can easily be misunderstood and misinterpreted by non-experts and, when used as a basis for decisions, lead to unhappy consequences. Can these risks be diminished without limiting the informational freedoms of the information providers and without imposing paternalistic measures regarding the receivers of the information?
M3 - Article
SP - 113
EP - 119
JO - ICES, Journal for Information, Communication and Ethics in Society
JF - ICES, Journal for Information, Communication and Ethics in Society
SN - 1477-996X
ER -