I was reading Shelf-Life: Information Overload by Danielle Maestretti in Utne Reader the other day (in print actually, as I work in a library and am lucky enough to see a copy before it hits the stacks). I’m starting an MS program in Information Science in a few weeks because I love my job, but I’m admittedly a little old school with my reading habits. That is, I mainly read books and magazines in print (aka, hard copies). I don’t have a Kindle. I don’t really want one. I like to read, but not as much as I used to–I read voraciously as a kid, but I have a lot of other hobbies these days. As a maturing hipster about to start a new career, I will be in classes with 23-year-olds who barely remember life pre-internet! I figure I ought to make myself aware of the debates about online literacy so I don’t sound like an old curmudgeon lamenting the good ol’ days when Google wasn’t a verb.
Not that I’m that old-school. I have moved away from reading the newspaper in print, and I scan the “front page” of The New York Times, The Albany Times Union, and BBC World News (not a paper, but still) online on a daily basis. I also regularly visit Al Jazeera, The Guardian, Democracy Now!, AlterNet, Counterpunch, Z-Mag, and even on occasion, The Onion. Am I “really reading” when I check the news online? I’d say yes and no.
Maestretti argues that the “real problem” isn’t whether or not we are
really reading. Instead, she asserts that “we have access to more information than ever, yet we do not know what to do with it. We are desperately information-illiterate.” Is this true? Again, I’d say yes and no. I often assist technologically challenged folks navigate their way through online job applications at, for example, the local grocery store chain’s website. They will often leave the “email” field blank, muttering, “but I don’t use email!” They become even more frustrated when they click “submit” and those red letters shouting “required field” appear. It’s a hard fact of the new millennium that even the lowest level jobs require some information literacy to apply, even if the job itself will never require an applicant to use a computer.
Maestretti does recognize that tech-savviness varies across age and class. She’s particularly concerned that teens who seem tech-savvy because they’ve got Facebook accounts and play video games are not necessarily able to evaluate information they find online: “Using search engines and databases fluently, and knowing how to find, filter, and assess accurate information, are skills that must be taught, by a parent, teacher, friend, or librarian.” As a library worker, I can vouch for the fact that this ain’t a generational thing. Maestretti says “what matters is not that we are readers, but that we are critical readers.” This has always been true, and critical literacy and critical thinking have long been buzzwords in education circles, so I’m not sure it’s merely reading and seeking information online that’s the issue.
Maestretti does raise the question of the driving force behind Google, bing, and other corporate search engines, and this is where she and I begin to see eye to eye: “Even champions of independent media tend to forget that the way we find information online is governed by private companies, not benevolent librarian types who want to unite us with the precise, accurate data we seek.” It is something to think about: When we perform our latest verb, are we contributing to or participating in the corporate machine? Yes. And, no. Definitely maybe.
What I like about Google, and why I tend to use it more than any other search engine (when I want to use a search engine), is the lack of visual clutter. Sure, they have sponsored links, but the “ads” are text only. The difference between the kind of hits when googling “cancer” or “cannabis” are clear to me, but I have a lot of research experience. I think that’s the key: If an individual has already learned to evaluate print sources, odds are figuring out that surgery information provided by the National Library of Medicine is more credible than someone’s Under the Knife blog. Critical online literacy isn’t just about sources–it’s also about figuring out how to find those sources in the first place. Many individuals seem to be under the assumption that Google is in and of itself a primary source (e.g., “I read it on Google.”) I also have found that many individuals haven’t learned the distinction between a search engine and a database. We are definitely 411 overloaded these days, and with the unemployment rate as high as it is, it’s crucial that information literacy advocates work toward access and instruction in addition to evaluation.
