Lies, Damned Lies, & Web Pages

By Chris Sherman About.com  08/10/99

"There are three kinds of lies: Lies, damned lies, and statistics."

This famous aphorism, often attributed to Mark Twain, can be said another way: "Don't always believe everything you read."

This is especially true when you're searching for treasure in the world's largest "information gold mine"—the World Wide Web. Sure, the Web is a great source of authoritative, high quality information. But it's also littered with pages full of inaccuracies, partial truths, and outright lies. Twain again: "A gold mine is a hole in the ground with a liar on top."

Want proof of the Web's duplicity? It's right here on this page. The links above will take you to the Web pages where I found the quotes from Twain. But there's a big problem with both quotes.

They aren't Mark Twain's words.

The "damned lies" quote comes from Twain's autobiography, but the words aren't his—they're a quote from former British Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli. And there is no record of the "gold mine" quotation in Twain's books or papers. Because he was such an adept quipster, Twain gets credit for many things he didn't say, according to Twain authority and About.com Guide Jim Zwick.

This highlights a key problem with the Web. It's carelessly used as a primary source of information, when in fact it's more often a secondary source. Someone reads an inaccurate statement on the Web, quotes it on another Web page, search engines obligingly index all of the inaccurate pages, and we end up with a mess where fiction is accepted as reality.

Judging the accuracy or quality of information you find on the Web can be tricky, particularly if you're searching for scholarly or academic material. (For a hilarious example, try The Postmodernism Generator, which creates seemingly impressive scholarly papers, complete with footnotes—but they're complete nonsense!)

Nonetheless, there are a number of steps you can take to help you separate online gold from worthless dross. Here's a short checklist that's easy to apply to any Web site.

Evaluating Quality on the Web: A Checklist

• Read the About Us Page. Corporate Web sites should provide plenty of information about the company, its products and services. If you're reading a page created by an individual, who is the author? Do they provide credentials, or some other kind of proof that they write with authority? Is contact information provided, or is the author hiding behind the veil of anonymity?
• Look For Bias. Bias can be subtle, and can be easily camouflaged in sites that deal with seemingly non-controversial subjects. Bias is easy to spot when it takes the form of a one-sided argument. It's harder to recognize when it dons a Janusian mask of two-sided "argument" where one side consistently (and seemingly reasonably) always prevails. Bias is particularly insidious on so-called "news" sites that exist mainly to promote specific issues or agendas. The key to avoiding bias is to look for balanced writing.
• Look at the URL. Does the URL seem "appropriate" for the content? Most companies, for example, use their name or a close approximation in their URL (the "http" address of the site). A page stored on GeoCities or Tripod is not likely to be an official company Web site. URLs can also reveal bias. You can expect that a page entitled "Love Your Fellow Man" on the Vatican's site will be a very different polemic indeed on neo-nazi.org.
• Examine the Links. Hyperlinks were originally created to help authors cite references, and can provide a sort of online "footnote" capability. Well-balanced sites have a good mix of internal and external links. For complex or controversial issues, external links are particularly important, allowing you to easily access alternative points of view from other authors.
• Use Common Sense. Apply the same filters to the Web as you do to other sources of information in your life. Ask yourself: "How would I respond to this if I were reading it in a newspaper, or in a piece of junk mail." Just because something is on the Web doesn't mean you should believe it—quite the contrary, in many cases.

For more pointers and tips, see the excellent page Information Quality on the Internet. This page also features a quality evaluation checklist, and is illustrated with numerous annotated examples. Another good resource is the Internet Detective, an interactive tutorial that teaches you how to think critically about Web content.

The important thing, to quote Mark Twain (yes, this one's accurate) is to "Get your facts first, and then you can distort them as much as you please."

Smoking Out Fraud and Hoaxes

Inaccuracies are annoying, but there's an even bigger problem with the Web. Some sites have been created to deliberately mislead users. It's not a small problem. Several months ago, a clever charlatan created a bogus Web site that spoofed the respected Bloomberg news service, trumpeting an alleged corporate takeover. The scam was effective, briefly boosting the share price of the alleged takeover target before the scheme was shut down.

Fortunately, there are skilled cybersleuths who can help you avoid these particularly nasty online frauds. About.com has its own version of the X-Files' Agent Mulder. He's David Emery, Guide to Urban Legends and Folklore, and he consistently proves that when it comes to the Internet, the truth is out there. Widely regarded as an expert on Internet myths and hoaxes, David's been featured in the New York Times, the Houston Chronicle, The Guardian (London), and on the TV series CNET Central.

I asked David to share his best tips, techniques, and secrets for getting to the truth behind Internet chicanery. To learn how he ruthlessly investigates and skewers Net myths, hoaxes, and urban legends, read on.

The Truth is Out There:
Talking with About.com Urban Legends Guide David Emery

 

It's no wonder that David Emery is a skilled cybersleuth. Combining the habit of disciplined inquiry he learned as a student of philosophy, with his creative skills as a Hollywood script writer, he can grasp both the logic of a hoax and its psychological mass appeal.

His method is to surgically dissect bogus Web pages or hysteria-tainted email, peeling back layer after layer of fiction and deceit, until the hoax is fully exposed, stripped of all shreds of credibility.

In a recent email exchange, David described his approach to unmasking Net fraud, and recommended useful sites that provide hoax and myth information that help you separate wheat from chaff. I hope you find his insights as interesting and useful as I did.

David, as About.com's Urban Legends Guide, you've probably developed a "sixth sense" for hoax, deception, and parody. When you're looking at a Web page for the first time, what sorts of things do you look for to determine whether you can trust the information you're reading?

First of all, I try not to depend on any one source of information. This is a good idea in general, but especially on the Internet, where sometimes you don't have the slightest idea where the information you're looking at came from.

In addition to that, some things I look for on a Web page are:

• Is it signed? Has the author provided a name and a way to contact him/her? You can't trust a text no one will take responsibility for.
• Does the author provide outside links and/or cite sources by means of which the information can be authenticated?
• Does the author state his or her credentials?

Looking at the text itself:

• Does it read as if the intent is to provide useful information, or like it's trying to push emotional buttons? Scare tactics are a bad sign. Don't trust a text that assaults you with lots of UPPERCASE LETTERS and exclamation points!!!!!!!!!!!
• Does it make sense? Hoaxes often contain statements that are self-contradictory. People who don't really know what they're talking about say illogical things.
• Are the claims plausible? That is, do they fit in with your ordinary understanding of how things work or do they seem outlandish? We folklorists have a rule: if a story seems too good (or too outrageous) to be true, it's probably not.
• Does the author offer evidence to support his or her claims? Beware of people who -insist- what they're telling you is true without giving you reasons to believe it.
• Are you able to find the same information elsewhere? Does it contradict information you've read elsewhere? Be skeptical, for example, if you read about events that, if true, ought to have been in the news but were not.

How do you evaluate the quality of a Web site that deals with a subject that's unfamiliar to you? I can tell you I wouldn't have a clue how to determine if the "Build Your Own Nuclear Reactor in 30 Days" site was legit or not.

The first thing I do is look to see if reputable authorities on the topic have addressed it in print somewhere. I search for news articles, books, or Web sites where experts have published their evaluation or been quoted.

Failing that, I try to familiarize myself enough with the topic to give a layman's opinion, citing reasons and evidence for the conclusions I come to. I'll also look at the way the information is presented—apart from the subject matter itself—and draw attention to any internal clues (such as logical inconsistencies or scare tactics) that the text is suspect.

Why do you think people are so gullible when it comes to believing what they read on the Internet? People who regularly trash junk mail and hang up on phone solicitors don't hesitate to spam a hoax email to their entire address book. What's so special about the Net that it makes common sense fly out the window?

It's many things. For one, the Internet is a relatively new way of sharing information. Most people are used to getting it from "trusted sources" like books and traditional media, and are unprepared for the free-for-all they find on the Internet. They don't have the healthy sense of skepticism they need and have to learn new habits.

The printed word has a special aura, of course—we're naturally a bit more trusting of information we read than information we hear. The Internet compounds the problem by making it so easy to reproduce texts again and again. There's also a homogenizing effect. HTML aside, every text looks the same in email form. So, for example, there are no surface clues to tell you whether a message you received purporting to be an "actual" news article really is real or not.

And don't forget that rumors, hoaxes, and urban legends are, by their very nature, constructed to seem convincing and to push our emotional buttons. Because it's so easy to copy and forward these things, many of us have a tendency to click before we think. I always recommend reading any forwarded email you receive more than once. It sometimes takes that second or third look to see through the emotional manipulation and realize you're being hoaxed.

What are your favorite techniques and resources (other than your own site, of course) for investigating a Web site or email you suspect is bogus?

There are several excellent resources on the Web for checking to see if suspicious information has already been debunked:

• The Urban Legends Reference Pages offer a vast archive of urban legends, rumors, and hoaxes, each clearly rated as to its credibility.
• The U.S. Dept. of Energy's Computer Incident Advisory Capability maintains lists of known Internet hoaxes and chain letters. This site is very highly regarded and often cited in the press.
  Hoaxes: http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/CIACHoaxes.html
  Chain Letters: http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/CIACChainLetters.html
  
• The Computer Virus Myths home is a clearinghouse of reliable information on virus hoaxes and misconceptions.
• Even worse than hoaxes are scams, by which hucksters try to bilk people out of their money. They attempt to do this on the Internet by means of email cons and fraudulent Web sites. An excellent place to look for information on these is Internet ScamBusters.

If you can't find what you're looking for on the above Web sites, run a standard Web search. Use more than one search engine (I prefer Infoseek and AltaVista) and include Boolean operators to narrow down the results. You can often find enough related information to help you evaluate the text in question, if not complete articles debunking or confirming it.

If you're trying to verify the information on a Web page, you might also find results by searching for other sites that have linked to the page. On AltaVista, for example, the search parameters would look like this: "link:http://url-of-the-suspicious-web-page"

Another search strategy I often use is copying and pasting a snippet of the suspicious text into a search form and enclosing it in quotes. Choose an excerpt of six to ten words that contains relevant keywords. This will locate Web pages where the text has been quoted, and in some cases you'll find that the author has researched and commented on the text's authenticity.

It can also be very fruitful to employ the same strategy on Deja News. Everything under the sun gets posted and discussed in Usenet newsgroups at one time or another, and you'll often find that the information you're researching has been confirmed or debunked in groups related to the topic. You may even find pointers to useful URLs or references to news articles for further information.

On the next page of this article, I've pulled together links for some of the most infamous hoax and parody sites on the Web. Do you have some personal favorites?

As far as "hoax" Web sites, how about one glistening example? This is not necessarily a hoax, in that we can't be sure the deception was intentional, but it is a completely false story. It's usually entitled "The Tourist of Death", and can be found on literally hundreds of Web pages.

It's often prefaced with the statement: "This is unreal!." I have an article debunking it with the same title: 9/11's Tourist of Death.

David, thank you very much.

David's Urban Legends and Folklore site features more than 100 articles debunking popular myths and hoaxes. David also has provided links to hundreds of useful sites for doing it yourself. It's definitely worth a visit.

Want to see some of the most outrageous examples of hoaxes and parodies on the Web? Read on.

A Rogues' Gallery of Hoax & Parody Web Sites

The Bonsai Kitten

Drudge Retort
Internet gadfly and self-described journalist Matt Drudge specializes in getting the scoop on political and entertainment stories, though he's admitted to not always being accurate. In the Drudge Retort, Drudge himself is ruthlessly skewered by humorists with a mission of "putting the yellow back in journalism."

Feline Reactions to Bearded Men
A classic of bogus "science," intended as blatant parody but occasionally mistaken as a meticulously researched scholarly study. The URL for this page provides the tip-off: it's hosted on the Web site of the Annals of Improbable Research.

USA Toady
A send-up of the daily newspaper, featuring (you guessed it) toads, frogs, and other amphibians.

The White House
The White House is one of the most convincing parody sites on the Web. It's easy to believe that you're visiting the online residence of the President of the United States—until you start reading the details.