Re: Source of information

From: S Moonesamy <sm+mu_at_elandsys.com>
Date: Thu, 05 Nov 2015 11:10:46 -0800

Hi Ish,
At 10:15 05-11-2015, Ish Sookun wrote:
>That draws another question though. When talking
>of non-government source of information, whom
>should we point to? Should it be academia, press, or...?

The following applies for Wikipedia:
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikien-l/2003-September/006715.html

In general, you would look for a reliable source
of information. If it is about a scientific
topic, you could use a study from academia which
has been peer-reviewed as a source of
information. Quoting from
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5014165

   'Print and broadcast media used to play fast and loose with the quoting
    of unnamed sources. Part of the decline in media credibility was due,
    according to some academics, to that "you can trust me ­ I'm a journalist"
    mentality.

    By the late 1980s and early '90s, newsrooms began to rethink whether they
    had gone too far in assuming that the readers, listeners and viewers were
    still prepared to trust journalists who claim to trust their sources.'

You would have to determine whether the press
article is a reliable source of information. It
is better if the information can be verified from different sources.

>Interestingly, if the government is asked about
>internet in Mauritius, the answer would be 160K
>households in Mauritius have "high-speed" internet.

Yes. :-)

Regards,
S. Moonesamy
Received on Thu Nov 05 2015 - 19:29:33 PST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Thu Nov 05 2015 - 19:36:03 PST