Debates of all sorts discussion

Do you think Google is a reliable way to get information? Do you think Google has too much control over what information we read? Does researching via Google make people smarter, or does it just shorten their attention spans? etc.

It depends on what you search, where you search.

Actually, if you want to see something cool ..

Go on Google and search "how can u" and you get all sorts of results that finish the question you typed into the search engine. But now type "how can an individual" and be amazed.

A smart person doesn't need to know all the answers, but a smart person will know where to look for them.

Google is just the engine, it's not Google giving you possibly wrong info it's the sites you click on from Google. But most are pretty reliable.

This is true.

Google doesn't censor much... And as long as you know how to tell whether a site is reliable or not you should be fine.

Cody wrote: "Google is just the engine, it's not Google giving you possibly wrong info it's the sites you click on from Google. But most are pretty reliable."

I guess I should clarify. What I meant was, do you think people rely too heavily on using Google in order to get information––rather than say, going to the library and looking up books?

Well it's much more convenient.

It depends on what you're looking up, I think. Google is perfect for finding small bits of information but it isn't always the best if you're, say, doing a huge research project. Google can only give you so much of what you want, and you often have to sort through a lot of unreliable information to find it. Books tend to be more reliable since book publishing is much more exclusive, whereas anyone can create a website/blog/etc. and spread either information or misinformation on the Internet.

Don't get me wrong––I love Google. I'm just saying.

Brigid *Flying Kick-a-pow!* wrote: "It depends on what you're looking up, I think. Google is perfect for finding small bits of information but it isn't always the best if you're, say, doing a huge research project. Google can only gi..."

Not to sound rude, but duh. Of course books are going to be more accurate.

The problem is is how up to date books are and if you can even get them into your hands.

Google is definitely a good source, you can find loads with it. Print sources are also good, but can be much more of a hassle, and you'll rarely find that much more info in them than on the Internet.
As for searching and sifting through bunches of sites...same with sorting through books. Except Google is actually easier, as you can refine a search and get new results within seconds.

Tenebris In Lux wrote: "Go on Google and search "how can u" and you get all sorts of results that finish the question you t..."

O.O Wow. That's...impressive.

Also, if you search "eye monocle" images it will suggest "top hat." Google is pretty sweet xD

Heh :)

Emily [Without a word to go with thought] wrote: "Brigid *Flying Kick-a-pow!* wrote: "It depends on what you're looking up, I think. Google is perfect for finding small bits of information but it isn't always the best if you're, say, doing a huge ..."

I don't see why the "duh" is necessary. Some websites are just as reliable as some books. Plus, like you said, books can sometimes be outdated ... or have misprints, wrong facts, etc. And one can't simply go back and edit all the editions of one book, whereas a website can be easily edited. However, yes, books tend to be a more accurate source of information.

Books tend not to have significant misprints or wrong facts because they're very carefully edited and looked over to see if they're worthy of being published - the company picks and chooses :P However, books definitely can be outdated, that's their biggest problem.

Yes, but it's not unusual for a wrong fact or two to be accidentally overlooked. For the most part, books are thoroughly edited, but there are always little mistakes.

I have never noticed any factual mistakes in a non-fictional book, but if you say so :P

Well, unless you know every little fact in the universe, how would you really know if something was wrong or not?

Hence 'noticed'. But also, if you're doing research well, you cross-reference stuff you're going to use, so you would actually notice if there was a discrepancy there.

well, I mostly read fiction books, but I do notice errors in them sometimes, so I assume the same would be true for other books...stuff slips by sometimes.

Oh, that's true. But that's where the cross-referencing comes in :P

google is simply the engine that finds whats available, its up to you to determine the reliability of the sources it finds, google is simply another tool in our repertoire of information finding methods And seeing as google can take you straight to reputable journals with peer reviewed material in the way a library cannot (ie the library has a set number of journals) I'd say its a pretty reliable search engine. Bing can probably do much the same, but I prefer google.

Brigid *Flying Kick-a-pow!* wrote: "Well, unless you know every little fact in the universe, how would you really know if something was wrong or not?"

1) you check the fact exists outside that book 2) you check if the fact has been verified by peer review. Like Rachel says, cross referencing.

There're search engines out there that only look through peer-reviewed journals...I used to know them when I had a history class, I don't remember what they are anymore.

If you remember, I'd love to know what they're called :)

I checked the class website, it didn't mention them...sorry :(

s'ok, I reckon if I google "journal search engine" I'll find some :P

Yeah, or ask at the library or something, they probably know tons.

I was right.. the first one it brings up is google scholar, which I suppose is to be expected, then there was this:

http://www.scirus.com/

and a wiki page listing academic databases.

Awesome :)

Well yes, you can cross-reference. But for example, you could come across a fact you find really interesting in a book and not be able to find it anywhere else.

Then you can evaluate how reliable the book is as a source. If the author is an expert and has done original research, it's probably true; or if there's a bibliography, you can look at that; otherwise, you'd kind of have to wonder where the author got the fact from.

This reminds me of a quote in one of Dan Brown's books. "Google is not research" . It is merely a search engine which might turn up factually incorrect information. It all comes down to picking up the authentic information from the right website.You cannot blame the search engine for it!

This is true. This is why there are other search engines that have less, but better, information.

Akshaya wrote: "This reminds me of a quote in one of Dan Brown's books. "Google is not research" . It is merely a search engine which might turn up factually incorrect information. It all comes down to picking up ..."

Yes, exactly. It's not Google's fault people lie.