What makes it so good?
Undoubtedly there's a great deal of subjectivity involved here. Sometimes it's
the writing itself, though most often it's a down to earth approach to the subject,
and a lack of a grocery list of pointers such as "if it's '.edu' it's trustworthy".
I find it fascinating that I still encounter that argument, even though it has
close to no basis in fact. Principles
for Evaluating Websites, by Stephen Downes, is one of my favorites simply
because it deals less with the internet than it does with important questions
like how we judge point of view or bias - questions that are at the core of attempting
to evaluate any source of information.
Go to: Just who do you think you are?