Third Essay: October 20th

With the coining of Web 2.0, the Internet has exploded with websites that have become centralized around the users. Digg, a social news submitted site, allows users to submit news stories for other users to view. Over the course of the past week I have examined the search engines, Google, Yahoo, and EBSCOhost, in order to evaluate what relevant information exists out there on the World Wide Web about the social website, Digg, and to find the most efficient key terms to achieve said goal by moving past all the clutter to acquire applicable media sources.

Many Internet users today when using the Internet jump right to the big commercial search engines, Google or Yahoo (Tensen, 2004). I am no different and chose Google, Yahoo and an academic search engine named EBSCOhost. Seeing as how I would be researching for credible sources, I needed a unique batch of keywords to make sure the results would be legitimate as well as relevant. I decided to keep the keywords as broad as possible, but not to the point where I would get any type of information. The keyword, CO “DIGG Inc.” was chosen since it refers to finding company information about Digg Incorporated using Boolean Logic (Kaye and Medoff, 2001).

Google rewarded me with countless helpful entries. While Yahoo returned more user submitted news about companies that were posted on Digg. But EBSCOhost returned more results from newspapers and magazines. Since no one search engine is built the same, each search returned different results based upon how they were built. Google happens to have a page ranked system, while Yahoo has a directory-based engine, but as for EBSCOhost it is an endless database of information (Whitaker, 2002). Depending upon what search engine you use the code that lies behind all the images and text really determines what results you will see.

Evaluating the sources that returned from the search engines happens to be a difficult task if unfamiliar with the topic. There are a lot of conditions that need to be applied to each and every source, especially online to determine its relevancy and validity. Books have had standards since they were first published in the industrial age, but in the Internet age there are no set standards, “Because the WWW is not regulated like a library” (Tensen, 2004). Instead of institutions doing the work and filtering out what they consider good or bad, that privilege is passed onto the user. There are six conditions, according to Tensen that each source should go through in order to be considered, they are: reliable, purpose, source, intended audience, date of publication, appearance, and reputation, which seem to be common sense (Tensen, 2004).

With Google, as I said above, I was given an overwhelmingly amount of information, but most of the information that was returned was reliable. The first source that comes up is that of BusinessWeek, detailing the company information from the key executives to phone numbers to recent important business news involving the company. Applying the conditions to this site it is evident that it is giving me a brief overview of all the important information, and since it is Business Week, I know based upon its reputation that it is a reliable source.

Now, the next entry on Google is every professor’s worst nightmare, but in Digg’s case I believe an exception needs to be made. Digg is entirely user driven and the information is seen as creditable for other websites back that information up, which is very similar to Wikipedia. The information of the website is very in depth and gives the text citations, for questionable information. But I would have to say that the information is creditable and I would more than happy reference it in a final project as an example of how social content is changing the Internet.

Oddly enough Google has page ranked Digg’s own about page as the last result on the first page. Now what is better than going to the horse’s mouth and finding out all the information about the medium. This source is pretty self-explanatory. Who else is going to know more about Digg then well, Digg?

The last entry from Google happens to be the overall ranking of Digg on the web. Alexia is a website that ranks the traffic of all the websites on the web. With the information changing constantly about the rank, the site is continuously updated. Although the website is not an exact science it has been around long enough to once again have a reputation of being reputable and would make a perfect addition to any project requiring statistics.

As for Yahoo, their results were quite different, but helpful in a different way. Since Yahoo serves as a directory, the results were mostly submissions to Digg, with the exception of another Digg page, about the founder, Kevin Rose. Once again I feel that this website based upon its location is already considered important and valid, and worthwhile in being used in a project.

EBSCO on the other hand provided countless information. For instance the first website, BuisnessWeek, as we have already proven valid as a source. It speaks to users as a newspaper, as well as looks like one, and is recently dated. I would quote this article without looking over my shoulder. Since it is so reputable for a source EBSCO included in another time. The articles are quite business oriented but BussinessWeek does a great job capturing the social aspect, as they know their audience.

Since we are talking about newspapers the Wall Street Journal appeared by offering a bit of financial information about the social news website. Being available in both print and online, bolsters its ability of being professional, not to mention the name makes one think of Wall Street.

The last two articles are cover stories, one from Time, and the other from Computerworld. Both magazines are quite renowned in their own areas and have a extensive reputation, although Computerworld might not be as renown as Time. Yet, they serve their purposes to their groups that they serve.

Search engines are just that, they search. Some hit, and some miss. But when it comes down to it, they are just tools that we use to make our lives easier regardless of trying to seek out something that is valid or not.

Bibliography:

Grossman, Lev. (2008, May 12). Jay Adelson. Time, 171(19), 121.
Havenstein, Heather. (2007, May 7). Revolt Against Digg Tests User Content Model. Computerworld, 41(19), 1-16.
Kaye, Barbara K. & Medoff, Norman J. (2001). The World Wide Web: A mass communication perspective (chapter 2). Mountain View, CA: Mayfield Publishing.
Tensen, Bonnie L. (2004). Research strategies for a digital age (chapter 5). Boston: Wadsworth.
Whitaker, Jason. (2002). The Internet: The basics (chapter 1). New York: Routledge.