The datum
or information can be true, but if it is not perceived to be
transparent - it will not be considered reliable. Think about an
anonymous (=non-transparent) letter versus a signed letter - the latter
will be more readily relied upon (subject to the reliability of the
author, of course).
2. Reliability - is the direct result of transparency. Acquaintance
with the source of information (including its history) and with the
methods of its provision and dissemination will determine the level of
reliability that we will attach to it. How balanced is it? Is the
source prejudiced or in any way an interested, biased, party? Was the
information "force-fed" by the Government, was the media coerced to
publish it by a major advertiser, was the journalist arrested after the
publication? The circumstances surrounding the datum are as important
as its content. The context of a piece of information is of no less
consequence that the information contained in it. Above all, to be
judged reliable, the information must "reflect" reality. I mean
reflection not in the basic sense: a one to one mapping of the
reflected. I intend it more as a resonance, a vibration in tune with
the piece of the real world that it relates to.
Pages:
183
184
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207