The Internet and search engines have a problem, though: everything is
treated as being of equal value. You could say that Google's method of
assigning greater importance to pages that have more incoming links
helps, because it's as though those pages have been "cited" more often.
But still, if many different web pages are returned in a search result,
how do you decide which set of information is more reliable? Web link
popularity isn't always a good indicator. And if there's only a single
search result, should you take what it says as true?
Meanwhile, a well-annotated book at least gives you consistency with
respect to reliability. This is important especially for non-scholars
who like to study works that mainstream society considers obscure...
Hardin, Richard F wrote:
> On annotating: Has anyone weighed the Norton Anthology lately? The
> newest ed. has become something of a self-parody, bloated with apparatus
> and selections that could almost all be found via Google. The same
> tendency is observable in some Shakespeare texts. You wonder when the
> text publishing industry will catch up with the digital age.
> Dick Hardin
>
>
--
Kevin Farnham
Author: "MySpace Safety: 51 Tips for Teens and Parents"
Publisher: http://www.HowToPrimers.com
|