Let me start with a question right away. Do you think we can trust everything we read online?
Let's say a LiveJournal post about some event appears. Can we trust this post? Or should we assume the internet is a completely untrustworthy source?
It's now common to think of the internet as a cesspool, and drawing information from it is disrespectful. The logic of those who oppose the internet is very simple. You can post anything online anonymously. You can post any information online in five minutes, completely free of charge. And finally, no one prevents you from posting information remotely. For example, you can slander the mayor of a major city without even being in Russia.
It would seem that these three characteristics of the internet—anonymity, remoteness, and ease of posting information—speak volumes of credibility. That is, the internet is untrustworthy.
So?
No, that's not true. And now I'll explain why, on the contrary, you should trust what's posted online. And you should trust it much more than, say, television.
First, let's look at the actual programs airing on our idiot box. Let's say there's Gennady Malakhov, the proponent of urine therapy. Is he on TV? Yes. He hosts a health program. Malakhov recommends viewers treat themselves with kerosene, eggshells, and other nineteenth-century remedies that are, to put it mildly, not good for your health.
Further, there's a TV show called “Federal Judge” and several similar programs that supposedly show our Russian court. The question is, do these shows have anything in common with our reality?
The answer is obvious to anyone who has seen criminal cases, even from a distance. These programs bear no resemblance to reality. As proof, I can cite simple statistics. The acquittal rate in real criminal cases in Russia is less than one percent. Roughly speaking, ninety-nine out of a hundred people are convicted.
Of course, we don't see anything like this on TV. There, people are acquitted all the time. Nevertheless, such a program airs on our television, and many people who watch it are sincerely convinced that a real trial looks pretty much the same.
And finally, another very telling example: Academician Petrik. Academician Petrik promoted his nanofilters quite actively in various media outlets. However, actual testing showed that his filters don't filter water. And, what's more, under certain circumstances, they can even pollute the water.
Let me sum it up. Television and other media outlets, to put it mildly, don't filter the information they broadcast. This information should not be trusted under any circumstances.
Now, for comparison, let's look at the state of information reliability on the very Internet that some well-known public figures call nothing less than a “cesspool” and a “vent for damaged people.”
There's this girl, Natalya Kolesnikova. Last year, she posted something quite curious on her blog. She was driving along the M4 highway and witnessed a horrific accident. Severed arms, broken legs, blood everywhere… Paramedics who only agree to work for bribes. In short, the internet, as usual, went wild.
What happens after such stories air on television? Well, nothing really happens. People watch, are horrified, discuss it, and… forget about it.
What happened online? People started digging and discovered that there was no such accident on the M4 highway, that the hospital the girl was talking about doesn't exist, and that the whole story, from start to finish, was a fabrication.
As we can see, a cesspool is a cesspool, but an outright botch didn’t work.
Another example. Recently, a certain cheerful schoolboy, Denis Popov, happily reported that he had developed his own operating system. What's more, officials, delighted that we in Russia finally have our own operating system, even allocated some funding to this student, and even obliged some unfortunate school principals to install it.
How did the Internet react to this?
The internet reacted predictably. The “new” operating system was disassembled and revealed to be just a stock Ubuntu, slightly modified. Basically, the student hadn't written anything himself, but simply erased someone else's copyrights and passed off the well-established operating system as his own.
Again: the scam didn't work.
I think that's enough examples. Now I'll move on to the theoretical part. Why should you trust what you read on the internet? For two reasons.
Firstly, the internet is ubiquitous. No matter what the latest sensational news story is about, there's sure to be an expert or eyewitness who can provide reliable, first-hand information about the event.
Let's say, when there was an accident on the M4 highway, there were traffic police officers who looked at the daily traffic reports and reported that there had been no serious accidents during the specified timeframe. When similar misinformation is fed to us on television, there are, of course, obvious ones, but… they sit at home and keep their mouths shut.
Because there's no feedback on television. You can spit at the TV, you can unplug it… no one will even notice. Basically, you can lie as much as you want into the camera, and no one will correct you.
On the Internet, as soon as you start being disingenuous, an expert or eyewitness will immediately appear in the comments to correct you.
Not only that, but two heads are better than one. It's even better when you have not two, but two thousand or even twenty thousand. Every time you say something important or sensational on television, all those heads work separately. But if you happen to say something online, those heads start thinking together.
And if there is any contradiction, inconsistency, weak or unclear point in your words, rest assured that this point will certainly be pointed out to you via the Internet.
Simply put, you can't fool everyone. A few percent of your audience will inevitably catch you out in some lie or contradiction.
So, when it comes to traditional media, no one really cares about those few percent. They don't make a difference. But online, those few percent have a voice, too. And there's no way to shut them up.
Let me now sum it up.
You can't lie online with impunity. You'll be caught out. Therefore, information posted online should undoubtedly be trusted much more than information posted in other media. Fortunately, information posted online is subject to mandatory verification by numerous internet users.
