First, not all works we post necessarily reflect the opinions/positions of this site, and it is of course the responsibility of each writer first to check their own facts and present accurate information, especially since we try to be more open and democratic in what we post, even if we can provide some limited quality control.
We do try to ensure all articles include sources where applicable already. But we define sources more broadly than links, and footnotes or other citations are regarded as acceptable. For instance, we have posted academic essays with extensive footnotes, or that are based on original research done by the author, and in these situations we don't view links as necessary since the articles may be well-sourced according to a rigorous academic standard. We may still provide additional links where possible, but it's not guaranteed.
In other cases we may post something not available on the internet (eg a tanscript of a radio program, etc) and if so then we always provide the info on the original source, but it may not be possible to include a link. And in some cases a writer may be referring to their own research and/or experience so we may not be able to provide a link.
Obviously, then, there are so many exceptions it's very difficult to enforce a general policy on links within essays. We do already try to provide links to sources in all cases in which they are available, whether within an essay/column/post or at its end, and we are requiring this especially of our own columnists where applicable (see Rev Blair's latest column for instance).
Frankly, however, the best way to demand accountability is not necessarily through links, and I certainly don't think internet links/info are the ONLY criteria that should be used when judging the credibility of the work we post or any work for that matter. If you have doubts, check out the author's other work, contact the author directly and ask for more info, Google the info, seek out other perspectives, make a comment and start a debate, and do your own research.
I have added this information to the FAQ, as well as info on how to get biographical info on someone and finding the date an article was published/posted.
- Susan
Comments
view comments in forum
You need to be a member and be logged into the site, to comment on stories.
Personally I am of the opinion that all sources should be checked by the writer, the reader, and a disinterested third party. That isn\'t really workable, so we\'ll just have to go back to the old way of doing things. Find as many sources as possible...not just those that you agree or disagree with. Read them. Go from there.
The information here is as valid as the information anywhere. Following only the links a writer provides is likely only to prove his or her point. Read what you see here. Filter it through your own experiences. Keep in mind that the author did the same. Catalogue it, compare it, check it out. Draw your own conclusions. Make sure you\'ve thought it through.
I started this by saying, \"...that if you question something, even slightly, you should search out your own sources and make up your own mind.\" If you don\'t question things, even slightly, then you aren\'t thinking. The last person I met who was 100% right 100% of the time was an idiot. The next idiot I meet will have similar percentages.
I haven\'t read anything on here yet that made me think the writer was an idiot. I\'ve read a couple of things that showed me I was in danger of becoming one.
---
"So many right-wing christians, so few lions." - t-shirt I saw @ school