When Pages Aren't Made of 1s and 0s

This is a blog about independent media (mostly) and encyclopedias are media.

Christopher Dawson, anti-Microsoft blogger at ZDnet, recently published a post proclaiming, "Good riddance, Encarta!" Yes, Microsoft Encarta will be phased out this year. But is that necessarily a good thing?

While I love to see Microsoft (and any big corporation, for that matter) blasted, I can't help thinking that there can be benefits to the establishment media (more on this later today or tomorrow, in a post of the inaugural Izzy Awards). They can get some things right, and you can always look to see where their interests lie. Take a look at ZDnet itself. It reveals on the website that it's owned by CBS. Their bloggers disclose their affiliations. But just like Wikipedia, independent media can get things wrong or show bias.

Writes Dawson:

I’m not saying Encarta was a bad product. On the contrary, it did a fine job of making encyclopedic articles searchable and accessible on a computer. However, I’m thrilled to see it go because of what it represents. Kids will just go to Wikipedia or the first three hits on Google, now, right? While that remains too true, what it really represents is the absolute challenge to educators to teach kids real Web-based research skills.

Many people are lazy and will just go to Wikipedia and the first three hits on Google. But this isn't research. Wikipedia can be hacked. The first three hits on Google won't give you alternative viewpoints or extend your knowledge beyond the scope of what the Wikipedia article will tell you. You need to dig deeper and consult more sources. And what about books? If you want to compare perspectives on Martin Luther King, Jr., you have decades of research and original thought available at your local library.

(Exception to the "first three hits are the same" rule: The third hit for a Google search "Martin Luther King" is martinlutherking.org, a website run by the white supremacist group Stormfront. Check it out, and tell me if that's a source you want Little Johnny using for his paper.)

What is needed is the teaching of good research methods. For beginning research, a mainstream encyclopedia is as good a source as any. From there you dig in and analyze critically. I wouldn't expect Little Johnny to expose Microsoft cover-ups (indeed, the EU believes it doesn't even need a watchdog), but he should consult a variety of sources, some of which are infrequently cited among bloggers because they are accessed only through specialty retailers and libraries: books. There is still history in those, too.