# data[].attributes.body
Middle school

# data[].attributes.body
B.4.3 Learners gather information appropriate to the task by: Systematically questioning and assessing the validity and accuracy of information.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Table of Contents

Part 1: The Need to Evaluate Internet Resources
Part 2: Evaluating Online Resources
Part 3: Checklist on Evaluating Online Resources
Part 4: Improve Your Evaluation Skills
Part 5: Content Issues: Plagiarism, Copyright and Accessibility

Why Do We Need to Evaluate Online Resources?

Everyone and anyone can create content online. Today, it's hard to determine whether an internet resource you find is authentic or not.
Evaluating online resources is an important step in any research process. Identifying trustworthy content should be part of your research journey.
If you're looking for factual resources, search through newspaper publications, TV news, journals, official pamphlets, books, and magazines. But, nowadays people opt to search for information on the Internet. They tend to believe anything posted on the Internet without even checking for credibility.

Satire and fake news sites publish erroneous data; people believe these sites because of its persuasive, believable nature. If you're looking for a credible resource, you should avoid hoax sites as this may affect the veracity of your study.

Meanwhile, many content publishers rely heavily on copying content and owning those as theirs to get decent followership. Duplicating content and passing it as if it is their own content is copyright infringement or plagiarism.

In this guide, we will help you improve your knowledge and skill in evaluating online resources. We will guide you on how to check a resource for authenticity and credibility.

Moreover, we will discuss skills that you will need to assess a resource such as speed reading and skimming. As an evaluator, you should be familiar with the different citation and referencing styles. Also, we will review several content issues like plagiarized content, DMCA, and copyrights, and web content accessibility.

Evaluating Online Resources

There are several aspects that you should look for in evaluating online resources. You should check:

who published the content (Authorship),

where was it published (Publication),

when was it published (Currency and Relevance),

the truthfulness and integrity of the facts (Accuracy),

how it is written and presented (Purpose and Objectivity),

and what references are cited within the article (Links)

Authorship

The author of the content is a concern when considering the eligibility of the content. First of all, the author should be an expert in the subject discussed in the article. He should have the credentials to back up his knowledge of the subject matter.

Usually, the information about the author can be found on the website along with the content. The name of the author can be found below the title, on the side of the article, or at the bottom. Sometimes, more information on the author is found below the article, also known as an author bio. An author may be credibility if he is oftentimes mentioned in other authoritative websites.

But, it is not easy to verify an author's background through the Internet. Website articles and resources rarely have fact-checkers or editors for copyediting an article. Another thing to consider is that authors vary in tone and purpose. Some do it for their personal blog. Other authors are advocates of a cause, while others do it for marketing their product or service.

Publication

If the information about the author is not present, the publisher of the resource article can be checked for authority.

Take a quick look on the website. Are you familiar with the publication name? Is the publisher reputable and credible on the subject matter? Look at the website name, its logo, the URL of the website, and other indicators that can prove its reliability on the topic. One quick look at the URL can help you determine if it's a reliable source or not. Trustworthy websites end in .org, .edu, .gov, or any recognizable web address.

Another way to check the publisher's site is via its About Us and Contact Us page. These pages will contain information about the publisher. You can countercheck their details by conducting another search.

Reliable websites publish content that is relevant or under the same scope as the resource page that you found. Check how often do they publish content and if they published related content as well. News and publication websites (NYTimes, BBC, The Washington Post, TIME, etc.), are authority sites for facts. Consider the resource's credibility if the publisher has mentioned or been mentioned by authority sites.

Currency and Relevance

In conducting a research, the currency and timeliness of data are important in making inferences for data gathering and analyses.

David Loshin, President of Knowledge Integrity, is a well-known thought leader in data quality and management. He has defined the difference between currency and timeliness when it comes to data:

"Currency," Loshin explained, "refers to the degree to which data is current with the world that it models. Currency can measure how up-to-date data is, and whether it is correct despite the possibility of modifications or changes that impact time and date values. Currency rules may be defined to assert limits to the lifetime of a data value, indicating that it needs to be checked and possibly refreshed."

On the other hand, timeliness refers to the time expectation for the accessibility of data. Timeliness can be measured as the time between when data is expected and when it is readily available for use."

Information changes throughout the years. On the Internet, it's easy to get lost among the billions of data available at your fingertips. Even academic articles such as theses and investigative reports can have obsolete data. Out-of-date content has information that is not relevant or applicable in today's time. How can you determine if the content that you're looking at isn't outdated? How do you check if the data you have is current and timely?

Look for the date of publication. Oftentimes, it is located near the title of the resource. You can look for the date at the side information of the article, and even at the end of the article.

Currency is a modern issue; some websites update their articles to adapt to the modern world. Data does not become obsolete, but you need to check its relevancy to the current times. For updated content, look for the date of publication and the date when it was recently changed and updated.

Here's an example from Purdue Online Writing Lab (OWL):

The American Psychological Association (APA) is used as a citation style in academic and scholarly articles for social sciences. Since it started in 1929, the APA style has changed over the years and it is on its 6th edition.

With that said, updated resources oftentimes tag relevant statistical data with proper citations and referencing. Aside from that, these resources mention other resource and link back to them, regularly updating any link references should they find that those links are obsolete.

Accuracy

In writing, accuracy refers to a writer's correctness in using the language system. This means that the writer's use of grammar and vocabulary should be correct and as good as it could be.

Minimal errors are virtually present in all kinds of publication, but poor spelling and grammar can easily reflect how careless an author is, and this may result to distrust. Again, web resources are prone to technical errors since not all web publications go under the scrutinizing eye of a copy editor.

Online resources can be verified easily through a quick search on the Internet. Other resources provide a reference list that can help in double-checking facts cited within the article.

Purpose and Objectivity

An online resource clearly serves its purpose  it should teach, inform, explain, or persuade. By reading the article, it should become evident what the article aims to impart to its readers. The author should not be biased with his views reflected in the article, unless stated otherwise. You should comprehend whether the content is backed up with facts or based on opinion and propaganda. The content should show its intended audience.

Links

Links are used to cite and credit references found in other websites. During evaluation, links on the content are useful and relevant to the topic of the content. On the other hand, links on the content should proceed to an existing web page. In any case that the links within the content proceed to a 404 page or "Not Found", the content may be outdated, thus may be unreliable for new information.

Checklist on Evaluating Websites

We'll help you assess online resources easier with this concise infographic checklist brought to you by Hosting Facts:

Improve Your Evaluation Skills

Effective evaluation of online materials requires a set of skills. To effectively evaluate online materials, you must be able to do proper speed reading and skimming of content, as well as citing of references. Possessing these skills will give you the ability to objectively and successfully critique online materials. Let's discuss in detail how these skills can help you in evaluating content.

Speed Reading and Skimming

Before you will be able to evaluate any material, you will have to read it first. Going through the whole thing, even up to every punctuation mark, can eat up your time. Reading entire materials will not be practical especially if you have a lot of materials piled up. Therefore, it is vital that you possess speed-reading and skimming skills.

The average reader can run through approximately 200 words per minute. A good reader can reach 400 to 500 without sacrificing comprehension of what he had just read. Any more than 500 words risk losing comprehension so going beyond that is not advisable. We shall then consider those who can read at least 400 words a minute as a speed reader. It is, however, crucial that comprehension is maintained as there is no point in being able to finish a material quickly if you were not able to pick up anything from it. Speed reading is therefore a fast-paced manner of reading that retains understating of the material.

There are two speed reading techniques: scanning and skimming. Scanning is a very quick running through of the material in an attempt to find a specific piece of information. If you pass through an article very quickly in search for a name, a date, an amount, or the likes, what you are doing is scanning. Skimming, on the other hand, is rapid reading that goals to get the main ideas contained in the material in an effort to get the general overview of the content. Skimming is then considerably slower the scanning.

In trying to evaluate online materials, what you would most likely do is to skim through them. Unless, of course, if you're trying to look for a specific information that you are trying to verify. Skimming through an article allows you to quickly complete a material without losing its essence.

Skim effectively and finish a lot of materials with less time. Always remember than comprehension must never be sacrificed for speed. Speed reading is a total waste of time if you did not understand what you have just read.

Citation and Referencing Styles

In order to check the validity of the facts stated on an online material, references must be presented so that you can verify them. It is the responsibility of the author of the material to include citations and references in a way that follow standard referencing styles, but as the evaluator, you must also be aware of how to do this so that you can use it as criteria in critiquing the said material.

First of all, have a check on the references of the material. Make sure that these are credible resources. A lot of satirical sites and content are available on the web and one may easily come across them and eventually use them as part of the material. The writer must be careful enough to distinguish the validity and credibility of the site or content that he is basing his material from.

There are a couple of ways to include ideas from other materials into your own. It can be done through quoting, summarizing, or paraphrasing. Quoting is done by directly placing portions or parts of what was included in your resource material. It is a word-for-word placement of the resource material. Summarizing is providing a shorter version of the resource material while acknowledging that your material is based on the information you got from the source. Paraphrasing is trying to reword your source material but with the necessary attribution of where you got the idea from.

These three methods of including ideas from other materials should have a list of references. This list of references must obey one of the referencing standards and styles. There are two prevailing referencing styles that are being followed: the APA format, and the MLA format.

The Modern Language Association (MLA) format is distinguished by the following characteristics:

1. Authors' and editors' names are spelled out completely. If there are more than three authors, list the first one only and then write "et. al" as a substitute for all other authors.

2. Important words in a title is capitalized.

3. The shortened name of the published is placed.

4. Only the city is placed on the place of publication.

5. Dates are placed at the end of the citations.

6. The second and subsequent lines are indented while the first line is made to align with the left margin.

7. In-text citation uses authors name and page.

On the other hand, the American Psychological Association (APA) format is as follows:

1. All authors are listed and uses last name, and then the first initial.

2. Only the first word in a title is capitalized.

3. Full names are used for publishers.

4. Includes state abbreviations for the place of publication.

5. Dates are placed after the author's name.

6. The first line of the citation is indented while subsequent aligned to the left margin

7. In-text citations use author's name, date of publication, and page number.

Always remember that citation is done because you have the responsibility to give credit to the author of your source material. You would not want to steal other people's work. Also, you would not want other people from passing of your work as their own so you must also do the same for the work of others.

The MLA Style Center is the best and most interactive guide you can check out for your research. Aside from a citation guide, they also have a research format guide for your paper and a FAQ section.

Meanwhile, to see how APA citations are usually written in reference lists, visit this guide made by The University of Western Australia. It's already updated to the 6th edition. Here you can check how different resources are cited, such as Books and eBooks, Journal articles, Newspapers & Magazines and Web sources (pages, blogs, social media, etc).

Content Issues: Plagiarism, Copyright and Accessibility

Plagiarism, copyright infringement, and problems with accessibility are some of the issues that you may stumble upon when dealing with online content. Let's discuss in detail the implications of each of these content issues.

Plagiarism: Problems of Duplicity

One of the biggest sins you can commit while writing online materials is plagiarizing, which is the omission of reference to the original source of information, which gives an impression that it is the writer of the material at hand who originally said a statement even if that is not the case. This can be done on purpose or as a result of neglect. Even if it is by mere neglect that the citation was not made, plagiarism is still inexcusable. Plagiarism can be committed against written or spoken texts, and even against graphical content such as photos, drawing, sketches, paintings, and the like.

As an evaluator of online materials, your goal is to identify whether the author of the material you are assessing committed plagiarism, may it be partial or total in nature. Plagiarism should never be tolerated, and it is the responsibility of the evaluator to ensure whether or not plagiarism was committed in any piece of material that he handles, especially those that the general public can see.

Plagiarism is really unfair to the original owner of the unduly cited content. It takes credit away from him and awards it to the plagiarizer. All the hard work, creativity, and that the original owner of the content is put into waste, while the plagiarizer is praised for creating outstanding content - of course, why would anyone copy something that he does not consider as at least a good write-up, statement, or photo?

DMCA and Copyright Issues

Merriam-Webster dictionary defines copyright as the exclusive legal right to reproduce, publish, sell, or distribute the matter and form of something (as a literary, musical, or artistic work). With a copyright, you can sue others who try to reproduce your work without your permission or consent. It is a protection given to the original creator, or to whom he grants the said protection, to benefit from his work.

In essence, violation of copyright (or more commonly referred to as copyright infringement) and plagiarism are similar. However, copyright infringement backed up by a legal construct while plagiarism is more of an ethical issue for academic, journalistic, or corporate institutions. Both of these promote originality and creativity as they protect the original creator of the work.

Copyright infringement and plagiarism do not go hand-in-hand. Not all cases of copyright infringement are cases of plagiarism as well, and vice versa. You can plagiarize content that do not qualify for copyright, and you can also commit infringement even if you have provided the necessary citation.

When talking about copyright, the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA) almost always follows. The DMCA is a copyright law of the United States which was made to implement two 1996 treaties of the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), as well as to heighten the penalties given to those who commit copyright infringement. The provisions of the DMCA will be discussed in detail on future write-ups focused on the topic. For now, it must just be fully understood that copyright infringement is a serious matter and there are strong laws against it.

As an evaluator, you must deal with copyright infringement issues before matters get worse. It is your duty to uphold the observance of applicable laws and ethical standards.

Content Accessibility

One billion people, or 15 % of the world's population, experience some form of disability, and disability prevalence is higher for developing countries. One-fifth of the estimated global total, or between 110 million and 190 million people, experience significant disabilities. - WorldBank.org

One billion people. A significant amount of this population have access to the Internet, but sadly, not all can access content found on the Internet. With the increasing demands for website accessibility, several countries have already pushed for accessibility legislation to support the disabled users' rights to information.

Disabled users commonly addressed by these efforts are those with visual, mobility, auditory, seizures and cognitive disabilities. Those with visual disabilities include low vision and color blindness. Motor disabilities include those who lack muscle control due to tremors or neurological conditions. Hearing impairments such as deafness are included in auditory disabilities. Meanwhile, people with seizures are a special case; those triggered by visual strobes or flashing effects are mainly affected in this category. Last but not the least, cognitive disabilities range from developmental to learning disabilities.

How does website accessibility help these users?

Website accessibility helps users to understand and access a website's information with the help of certain tools that aims to assist them in browsing a website. But, if a website is not optimized for accessibility, disabled users will have a hard time browsing a website.

There are available tools for the auditory and visually challenged to interact and use the Internet. Text-to-speech software and/or text-to-Braille hardware help blind users to access a website. For poor-sighted users, having a function to make the texts enlargeable would be helpful especially those without prescription glasses. Highlighting linked texts through underlines or contrast highlights will aid visually impaired users, especially those who are color blind.

Those with disabled motor abilities will benefit from large clickable areas like buttons on a website since they will lack precision in clicking small buttons. Moreover, coding a website that will let users navigate the website easily via keyboard or a single switch device can help them browse through the website even without using a mouse or a standard keyboard.

Today, playing videos has been less complicated as well. Those with hearing complications can now watch and understand the context of these videos through closed-captioning or via sign language. Meanwhile, flashing effects on websites are known to trigger seizure attacks. Minimizing or fully avoiding these effects will not be put those who are prone to seizure at risk.

Developmental or cognitive disabilities perhaps is the biggest challenge of them all. With various content available in different formats and in different contexts or degrees of reading difficulty, those who have a difficult time comprehending these content will shy away from a resource. Ideally, a resource content should be easy to understand, written in plain language, and equipped with instructional diagrams and even audio-visual aids.

To know more about website accessibility, Hosting Facts has another resource guide for web designers and developers on how to make your website accessible to all. This includes a brief history of web accessibility, steps on how to make your website accessible, and tools you can use to assess your website for accessibility in accordance to the guidelines set by WCAG 2.0.

With online content made accessible for everyone, even people with disabilities can understand and learn more information from the website.

Further Readings and References

APA citation style: Introduction. (n.d.) Retrieved July 21, 2016, from http://guides.is.uwa.edu.au/apa

Disability Overview. (n.d.). Retrieved July 20, 2016, from http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/disability/overview

Evaluating Information. (n.d.). Retrieved July 20, 2016, from http://guides.library.jhu.edu/c.php?g=202581

Evaluating Internet Resources. (n.d.). Retrieved July 20, 2016, from http://www.library.georgetown.edu/tutorials/research-guides/evaluating-internet-content

How to Make Websites User Friendly and Accessible for Everybody. (n.d.) Retrieved July 21, 2016, from https://hostingfacts.com/website-accessibility-guide/

Loshin, D. (2011). The Practitioner's Guide to Data Quality Improvement. Burlington, MA: Morgan Kaufmann.

The MLA Style Center. (n.d.) Retrieved July 21, 2016, from https://style.mla.org/

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Complete Guide to Evaluating Online Resources - HostingFacts.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Table of Contents Part 1: The Need to Evaluate Internet Resources Part 2: Evaluating Online Resources Part 3: Checklist on Evaluating Online Resources Part 4: Improve Your Evaluation Skills Part 5: Content Issues: Plagiarism, Copyright and Accessibility Why Do We Need to Evaluate Online Resources? Everyone and anyone can create content online.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
You may encounter media today from any number of sources, from traditional news sources to social media to email.

How do you know what to trust?

Ask these six questions and they will unlock whether something is trustworthy.

It's easier than you think. They will make you a more critical thinker and save you from being misled. (These come the book "Blur: How to Know What to Believe in the Age of Information Overload" by myself and Bill Kovach).

1. Type: What kind of content is this?

Recognize first what kind of content you're looking at.

Is it a news story? Or is it an opinion piece? Is it an ad or what some people call native advertising produced by a company? Is it a reaction to someone else's content?

Knowing what you are looking at is the first step to figuring out what you can believe.
" "

Part of knowing what you're looking at involves knowing who produced the content. Is it a news organization? Or is it a publication that is sponsored by a think tank, or a political group or a corporation? (If the story or graphic you're looking at came in a tweet or through a friend, look at the name of the organization, not just the name of the author. If you don't know the organization, look it up online.)

Another thing to know is where the organization gets its money. If it's a non-profit or an advocacy group, where did that money come from? If that isn't clear, that's a problem.

Does the content have an obvious political slant? There are a lot of new partisan sources for news now. Sometimes it's hard to tell from any single story whether the source is political. One way to identify partisan or political leaning is to see whether all the stories seem to point in a particular ideological direction, or would tend to reinforce the views of one party. If they do, that is a tip off that the site really has a political viewpoint. It's easy to recognize. Scan the stories quickly. You will know it when you see it, even if each story itself seems fairly straightforward.

Knowing what you are looking at is the first step to figuring out what you can believe.

2. Source: Who and what are the sources cited and why should I believe them?

News content usually cites sources for the information provided. These are the people quoted, or the documents or reports or data being referred to.

As you read, listen or watch a piece of content, note who is being cited. If it's text, print it out and circle the sources. Is it a police official? A politician? What party? If it's research, what organization produced it and what background if any is offered about them?

A major part of understanding sources is recognizing the level of knowledge that someone might have-or how close it is to being first hand. There are lots of different kinds of sources.

The key question is, how do they know? If it's not clear, you should be more skeptical.
" "

Sourceless News: Some news is actually "sourceless." If the president says something on television or in public, the account may cite no source at all. It was a public event for all to see.

The Journalist As Witness: The journalist or author could also be an eyewitness. In that case, the account may make it clear the author saw it but cite no one else.

Credentialed Experts: In some cases, the author or journalist may have such obvious expertise or credentials that they are a credentialed author/source. Doctors who are also reporters (such as Dr. Nancy Schneiderman on NBC News or Sanjay Gupta on CNN) are examples. An opinion column written by Nobel prize-winning economist Paul Krugman is another example.

Proximity of Knowledge: When we move to content that cites other sources, one question is how close is the source to the event. In other words, how well would they know what they are talking about? Are they a first-hand eyewitness? Or is it second-hand? In courtroom trials, only things that people saw for themselves are usually permissible as testimony. If they are an official source, such as police spokesperson, they are likely second- or third-hand witnesses, but they may be basing what they say on multiple first hand witnesses.

The key question is, how do they know? If it's not clear, you should be more skeptical.

Distance in Time: Time is also a factor. Research shows the more time that has passed since an event, the more faulty memory is. Police investigators know this well. So ask yourself: how far in the past did this event occur before the witness was asked to recall it?

If the source is a document (a study, or data), ask the same question: Who produced it and what background do you have on how the study was done and what other studies that group might have produced? There is no such thing as knowing too much about a source.

Then there are outside experts who might be asked to comment based on their experience. Just because they are called an expert doesn't mean they necessarily know a lot about this situation. Do they have a lot of experience with this kind of event? Have they done any research on this particular situation?

The source could also be anonymous (journalists using sources without naming them, because that person could get in trouble). If so, what background is offered about how this source would know what he or she is talking about and why you should believe them? And why were they were allowed to remain anonymous? Sometimes journalists simply fail to identify the source for some statistic or assertion to save time or because they forget.

Once you have identified who the sources are, ask one other thing: Do they have a bias?

If so, that doesn't necessarily mean what they have to say isn't reliable. Think about whether they are a witness to facts or are just describing their opinion. They may be the perfect authority. But this also leads to the next question you should ask

3. Evidence: What's the evidence and how was it vetted?

Evidence is closely related to but slightly different than source.

Evidence is the proof that the sources offer for what they know. It overlaps with how close someone is to an event. But even highly credentialed sources may begin to speculate sometimes. They may be guessing.

So, first, identify the evidence that any source is offering. Circle it. Write it down. Do it as an exercise a couple times. It becomes easy to recognize.

Trust the material that offers more evidence, is more specific and more transparent about the proof being offered.
" "

Is the evidence a document? Was it something the source saw as an eyewitness? Is it hearsay, or second-hand? Or are they speculating about someone's motives or what they might have done?

Next, what if anything did the author do to verify this evidence? Did they check with a lot of sources? Do these sources disagree? Can you see how they vetted the evidence?

If the report is specific, that helps. If it says "scientists agree," that isn't all that specific. But if it says they interviewed 15 scientists and they all agreed, you have a better idea of how much authority there is. If they say scientists examined 10 years of peer-reviewed scholarly research, more than 10,000 pieces of research, that is even more evidence.

Look for signs of a method-a method of verification. If you can see how the author or reporter checked or corroborated the evidence-if the method is explicit-that is a sign of more credible work.

Looking for these signs-and identifying what evidence a story contains-isn't as hard as it might sound. You simply need to start looking for it. And once you do, you will trust the material that offers more evidence, is more specific and more transparent about the proof being offered.

4. Interpretation: Is the main point of the piece proven by the evidence?

Most media content offers a thesis, or main point, of some kind.

The one exception might be a straightforward account of a breaking news event. Most other stories, however, are built around an idea, a trend, or even some angle on a news event. Even content that isn't narrative usually has a thesis or a point. For instance, most charts point you to a conclusion - like the number of people with jobs in America is going down or baseball salaries are going up.

So the fourth step in knowing whether something is reliable is to ask whether this main point makes sense, and whether the conclusions are supported by the evidence offered.

In other words, think about what conclusions are being drawn. Do they follow logically from what has been cited? Sometimes this is a matter of some conclusions making sense but others going too far. Are too many conclusions being drawn from evidence that doesn't support all of them?

We should expect enough evidence to prove the case. We shouldn't just take someone's word. The more evidence the better.
" "

One concept to keep in mind here is people may wrongly assume that because two events occurred the first one must have caused the second one. In fact, it could be a coincidence. Or the second event could have been caused by something else. This is a common mistake that people make from looking at data.

One way to test conclusions is ask if the same evidence might be used to draw a different interpretation. In science, there is a concept for this called the null hypothesis. It refers to the idea that whatever hypothesis a scientist is trying to test, one should also examine the possibility that there is another explanation.

Here's an example of the null hypothesis. If research shows that younger people are more inclined to use social media than older people, someone might think that they use social media because they are young. If that were the case, then logically, they would stop when they become old. But that is probably wrong. It might be they use social media more because they understand it better, and they will keep using it as they get older. That would be the null hypothesis.

When looking at media content, it means asking whether there might be a different conclusion to draw from the evidence in the story or content than the one presented.

To see if a story or segment or other form of media content lives up to its thesis, there are some simple indicators.

First, we should expect enough evidence to prove the case. We shouldn't just take someone's word. The more evidence the better.

Second, we should expect that the other side(s) are given a good hearing. Ask yourself this: are alternative views given the chance to make their best argument. If the alternative views are weakly presented, be skeptical.

Third, what is unknown, unanswered, unclear, should be acknowledged. Usually, news is simply the best obtainable version of events at the moment. Tomorrow we will know more. The best accounts admit this, and help us even more by acknowledging where the weak spots are.

Fourth, the best news providers and publishers let us know when new information comes along that contradicts or fills in what was thought before. These publishers feel responsibility for giving misinformation or partial information that may have left a wrong impression. They show that sense of responsibility by letting know when a better view has come along.

All of these are signs that the publisher is mindful of the null hypothesis, or that an alternative thesis might be as good or a better explanation. The man the police suspected initially might have been innocent. The conventional wisdom that in the long run the vote in Congress would hurt the Republican party was wrong.

Look for signs, in other words, that the author is skeptical and open minded.

5. Completeness: What's missing?

Most content should lead to more questions. An important step in being a critical, questioning consumer is to ask yourself what you don't understand about a subject. Look back at the piece. Did you miss something? Or was it not there?

If there was important information missing from the story, that is a problem. If something was explained so poorly that it wasn't clear, that's also a problem.

If something was missing and the story explained why-this couldn't be answered yet-that is a good thing.

The point of any news content is not just to tell you something. It should be to create understanding and also to help you to react or take action. So sometimes what might be missing from a story or segment or piece of content is what you can do about it.

6. Knowledge: Am I learning every day what I need?

This last, sixth question is less about checking one story than checking yourself to see if you are spending your media time well. It's almost like calorie counting.

Think about what media you consumed yesterday. What did you learn about? What did you read about? It can be hard to remember. But try. Jot down what you consumed for a couple days. You might be surprised. It also might not have been done in a conventional way. Maybe it came through social media. Or conversation. It's still consuming news.

Here are some questions you can ask yourself to see if you are learning what you think you should

What are some things you hear people talking about that you wished you understood better? Where could you go to learn?

Could I explain this situation to someone?

Look at top stories on a website or a newspaper front page? How many of them are you familiar with? Do you think you should understand them?

This process of critical thinking about media is something we all do. When you decide what to click on, what to read, and when you lose interest and stop reading, you are making critical decisions about what matters and what you trust or what you don't understand. These six questions are the same ones that editors and producers in the media world use to edit stories and make up web pages.

In the age when we are all both editors and consumers, we all need to know them.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Six questions that will tell you what media to trust - American Press Institute

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
You may encounter media today from any number of sources, from traditional news sources to social media to email. How do you know what to trust? Ask these six questions and they will unlock whether something is trustworthy. It's easier than you think. They will make you a more critical thinker and save you from ...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Did you see a horrifying claim about a candidate you despise on Twitter? How about a video explaining the "untold story" of COVID-19? Before you hit retweet, maybe you should pause and think: Am I putting something truthful and helpful out into the world? Or am I part of the problem?

Wait, what's wrong with sharing a funny meme or an earth-shattering social post? According to researchers (yes, there are people who study this stuff), sharing "fake news" isn't just an oopsie -- it's dangerous. It doesn't matter what it is: a headline error, a deliberate fake, an out-of-context statement, or misappropriated content (e.g., revenge porn). When you don't make the effort to verify the accuracy of what you share, you unwittingly contribute to the growing problem of disinformation.

---

According to Dr. Claire Wardle, co-author of Information Disorder: Toward an Interdisciplinary Framework for Research and Policymaking, disinformation is more pernicious than just-plain-wrong misinformation. It's more like propaganda, intentionally fake content spread by people (or governments) for their own gain (money, power, fame). Both types contribute to a chaotic news environment, in which folks don't know who or what to believe. And the more we share, the more we help bad actors achieve their goals. And while traditional news sources can be held responsible for what they report, social media platforms generally do not face liability for when their users post (and the platform later promotes) disinformation.

Though social media platforms try to keep up with all this stuff, it's really a game of whack-a-mole. After all, the major players, such as Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube, tend to amplify the most sensational bits of content regardless of their accuracy in order to keep users interacting and engaged (because that helps sell ads, which make the companies money). As the presidential campaign ramps up, the information wars are most likely going to get worse. With mass communication at our fingertips, companies need to make changes to address false content, but in the meantime it's up to us to take responsibility for our own individual actions. Here are five things to check before you share news about politics:

---

Does it pass your own "smell test"? Think critically about everything you see. Reflect for a moment on the piece of information you're considering sharing: Does it track with established facts you already know about the topic? Does it seem just a little too outrageous? Is the person who shared it trustworthy? Where did it come from? If it's from a family member, private-message them for more information. Dig deeper.

Is your blood boiling? Are you close to tears? Do you feel like you've "won"? Sensationalistic news is designed to prey on our emotions (sadly, we humans tend toward negativity bias -- which means we're more likely to pay attention to things that make us angry, afraid, and sad). While it's important to have good media literacy skills to sniff out misinformation, Dr. Wardle encourages folks to develop " emotional skepticism" -- that's when you do a reality check on any heightened emotional response you're experiencing to determine if your feelings are being manipulated by what you're looking at.

You can use Snopes, Factcheck.org, or any of these fact-checking resources to see if they've covered the piece of content in question. If you're looking at a meme, GIF, or other image, do a reverse image search on Google to see where else it comes up.

See how other sources are covering the same topic. Some sites and apps, such as SmartNews and Allsides curate news from many big outlets and label the political bias of the original source. Read laterally: Open up several tabs at once and cross-check information as you go.

Consider your own role as an information super-spreader. Ask yourself: Why am I seeing this piece of information in the first place? Social media allows creators to micro-target specific demographics so that their content will be legitimized through the act of sharing. Check the hashtag: Lots of folks make up hashtags that they want to go viral. If there's a hashtag associated with the content, investigate it to see who's behind it. Finally: Why are you sharing this? Does it only serve to confirm your beliefs and not further dialogue? Cross-examine your motives, and if you don't like what you find, just hit "save" and look at it later.

For even more resources to help navigate election season, visit our Young Voter's Guide to Social Media and the News.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
5 Things to Check Before Sharing News About Politics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Did you see a horrifying claim about a candidate you despise on Twitter? How about a video explaining the "untold story" of COVID-19? Before you hit retweet, maybe you should pause and think: Am I putting something truthful and helpful out into the world? Or am I part of the problem?

# data[].attributes.body
Where should we get our news from?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Evaluating Sources - Use the C.R.A.P. Test!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Depending on your field of study and current topic, you may use a variety of resources in your research. You will need to evaluate all of them to determine whether or not they are reliable and relevant to your current project. Whether you have a book, article, website, or other source, you can use the C.R.A.P.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Are we really in a post-truth era? Somebody on the Internet said so. Many people, actually.

The presidential campaign was filled with falsehoods. Our president-elect no longer poses as a truth-teller: Aides and supporters say we should not take him literally. That's good for him, since he endorsed a conspiracy theory that cast doubt on his own election. (Remember? He claimed without evidence that there were "millions" of illegal voters, who, if they did exist, might have swung the election to him.) Fake news stories about a Washington, D.C., pizza restaurant prompted a real person to "investigate" with a rifle in early December.

But let's properly define the problem. History and experience tell me it's not a post-truth era: Facts have always been hard to separate from falsehoods, and political partisans have always made it harder. It's better to call this a post- trust era.

Business, government, churches and the media have fallen in public esteem. These institutions paid a price for an entire generation of wars, scandals, economic convulsions and cynical politics. We're left with fewer traditional guideposts for whom to believe. The spread of fake news from fraudulent sources is only a symptom: The larger problem is that many Americans doubt what governments or authorities tell them, and also dismiss real news from traditional sources.

Hazardous as the post-trust era may be, it shouldn't cause despair. It's all right for Americans to be skeptical of what they read and hear. How could I say otherwise? I'm a journalist. It's my job to question what I hear. While I shouldn't cynically dismiss everything people tell me, I should ask for evidence and avoid buying into bogus narratives. Being a skeptical reporter has made me a more skeptical news consumer.

What we all need, as citizens, is to develop more skill in applying our skepticism. We need to spot false narratives, and also turn aside those who would replace them with pure fiction. Either we get this right or we cease to be free citizens.

Propagandists obviously have fun (and profit from) trying to con us, the public. Why not have fun smoking them out? You can apply this advice not only in hunting for totally fake stories, but also in testing out the stories on more or less fact-based websites or traditional TV and newspapers. (Even NPR.)

In general, traditional news organizations are more reliable because their business model is to paint the clearest picture of the world that they can manage. But in the post-trust era, we know that any news source can steer you wrong at times, and they're likely all jumbled together in your news feed anyway.

So here's a finder's guide for facts:

First, take a moment. If you have time to scroll Facebook or watch the news, you probably have a moment to decide if a news story seems credible. Ask some quick questions:

Is the story so outrageous you can't believe it? Maybe you shouldn't. Respect the voice inside you that says, "What?"

Is the story so outrageous you do believe it? That's also a warning sign. Many stories play on your existing beliefs. If the story perfectly confirms your worst suspicions, look for more information.

Does the headline match the article? Many compelling headlines don't.

Does the article match the news story it's lifted from? Many sites rewrite other news articles to fit the political slant of their presumed audience. Look for links to original sources and click through and see what the original says.

Are quotes in context? Look for the sentences before and after the quote that makes your blood boil. If the article fails to give them, that's a warning sign.

Is the story set in the future? It's hard to get firsthand reporting from there. Any story that tells you what will happen should be marked down 50 percent for this reason alone.

Does the story attack a generic enemy? Vague denunciations of "Washington" or "the media" or "Trump supporters" or "the left" should be marked down 99 percent. Good reporting doesn't make these kinds of generalizations and is specific about who is making a claim about what.

Are you asked to rely on one killer factoid? Not a good idea. If a hacked document "proves" an implausible conspiracy, look for the context that shows what the document really means. As for photos and video, use Ronald Reagan's old slogan: trust but verify. If there's any doubt about a "stunning" video, see if more traditional sources link to it. They love video clicks as much as anyone. If they refrain, there may be good reason.

Who is the news source, anyway? Traditional news brands may occasionally get it wrong - sometimes hugely wrong - but at least you know where to find them and hold them accountable. Less prominent news sites might carry compelling stories - but expect them to show you who they are and where they gathered information.

Does the news source appear to employ editors? Many news organizations produce stories that are checked before publication. Others don't. It's a big deal. Hiring an editorial staff shows the publication's respect for you, and matters more than "political bias." The New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, for example, have different owners, audiences, stories, perspectives and obsessions. Both have made mistakes and omissions; but both send reporters out into the world and back them up with an editorial process that catches and corrects many errors. This means both can be informative, regardless of your politics or theirs.

Are you told, "Trust me"? Don't. It's the post-trust era! Expect everyone to show where their facts come from, link to underlying articles, and demonstrate that they've argued honestly. Here's a way they may bolster their credibility:

Did the writer engage with anyone who disagrees? Did they call a senator whose legislation bugs them? Did they try to grasp what the president-elect was doing, or merely repeat one of his more outrageous statements? If it's a broadcast interview, was the guest presented with genuine opposing views and challenged to answer? Those who wrestle with opposing arguments do you a service and often improve their own arguments.

These simple questions should take you a long way toward judging the value of a news story. While applying such questions to any given story, you can also take a few more general steps:

Broaden your palate. Make a point to check sites that do not agree with your politics. You may discover stories that are wrong - but you'll know what other people are consuming, which will sharpen your own thinking.

Be open to the idea that some falsehoods are sincerely held. In spite of all the warnings here, some inaccurate news stories grow out of haste or misinformation rather than pure cynicism. (But they're still false.)

If a news source consistently passes the tests in this guide, support it. Gathering reliable information isn't free. Helping to pay for it aligns the news source's interests with yours.

If this guide helps you to find some reliable information, that's great - but remember one more thing: Never stop looking. Learning the truth is not a goal, but a process. As a journalist, I can never express everything in the world in a single day's program. The saving grace is tomorrow's program, when we try to do a little more. It is the same for me as a news consumer: I will always be learning more.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Are we really in a post-truth era? Somebody on the Internet said so. Many people, actually. The presidential campaign was filled with falsehoods. Our president-elect no longer poses as a truth-teller: Aides and supporters say we should not take him literally. That's good for him, since he endorsed a conspiracy theory that cast doubt on his own election.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Fake news is nothing new. But bogus stories can reach more people more quickly via social media than what good old-fashioned viral emails could accomplish in years past.

Concern about the phenomenon led Facebook and Google to announce that they'll crack down on fake news sites, restricting their ability to garner ad revenue. Perhaps that could dissipate the amount of malarkey online, though news consumers themselves are the best defense against the spread of misinformation.

Not all of the misinformation being passed along online is complete fiction, though some of it is. Snopes.com has been exposing false viral claims since the mid 1990s, whether that's fabricated messages, distortions containing bits of truth and everything in between. Founder David Mikkelson warned in a Nov. 17 article not to lump everything into the "fake news" category. "The fictions and fabrications that comprise fake news are but a subset of the larger bad news phenomenon, which also encompasses many forms of shoddy, unresearched, error-filled, and deliberately misleading reporting that do a disservice to everyone," he wrote.

A lot of these viral claims aren't "news" at all, but fiction, satire and efforts to fool readers into thinking they're for real.

We've long encouraged readers to be skeptical of viral claims, and make good use of the delete key when a chain email hits their inboxes. In December 2007, we launched our Ask FactCheck feature, where we answer readers' questions, the vast majority of which concern viral emails, social media memes and the like. Our first story was about a made-up email that claimed then-House Speaker Nancy Pelosi wanted to put a "windfall" tax on all stock profits of 100 percent and give the money to, the email claimed, "the 12 Million Illegal Immigrants and other unemployed minorities." We called it "a malicious fabrication" - that's "fake news" in today's parlance.

In 2008, we tried to get readers to rid their inboxes of this kind of garbage. We described a list of red flags - we called them Key Characteristics of Bogusness - that were clear tip-offs that a chain email wasn't legitimate. Among them: an anonymous author; excessive exclamation points, capital letters and misspellings; entreaties that "This is NOT a hoax!"; and links to sourcing that does not support or completely contradicts the claims being made.

Those all still hold true, but fake stories - as in, completely made-up "news" - have grown more sophisticated, often presented on a site designed to look (sort of) like a legitimate news organization. Still, we find it's easy to figure out what's real and what's imaginary if you're armed with some critical thinking and fact-checking tools of the trade.

Here's our advice on how to spot a fake:

Consider the source. In recent months, we've fact-checked fake news from abcnews.com.co (not the actual URL for ABC News), WTOE 5 News (whose "about" page says it's "a fantasy news website"), and the Boston Tribune (whose "contact us" page lists only a gmail address). Earlier this year, we debunked the claim that the Obamas were buying a vacation home in Dubai, a made-up missive that came from WhatDoesItMean.com, which describes itself as "One Of The Top Ranked Websites In The World for New World Order, Conspiracy Theories and Alternative News" and further says on its site that most of what it publishes is fiction.

Clearly, some of these sites do provide a "fantasy news" or satire warning, like WTOE 5, which published the bogus headline, "Pope Francis Shocks World, Endorses Donald Trump for President, Releases Statement." Others aren't so upfront, like the Boston Tribune, which doesn't provide any information on its mission, staff members or physical location - further signs that maybe this site isn't a legitimate news organization. The site, in fact, changed its name from Associated Media Coverage, after its work had been debunked by fact-checking organizations.

Snopes.com, which has been writing about viral claims and online rumors since the mid-1990s, maintains a list of known fake news websites, several of which have emerged in the past two years.

Read beyond the headline. If a provocative headline drew your attention, read a little further before you decide to pass along the shocking information. Even in legitimate news stories, the headline doesn't always tell the whole story. But fake news, particularly efforts to be satirical, can include several revealing signs in the text. That abcnews.com.co story that we checked, headlined "Obama Signs Executive Order Banning The Pledge Of Allegiance In Schools Nationwide," went on to quote "Fappy the Anti-Masturbation Dolphin." We have to assume that the many readers who asked us whether this viral rumor was true hadn't read the full story.

Check the author. Another tell-tale sign of a fake story is often the byline. The pledge of allegiance story on abcnews.com.co was supposedly written by "Jimmy Rustling." Who is he? Well, his author page claims he is a "doctor" who won "fourteen Peabody awards and a handful of Pulitzer Prizes." Pretty impressive, if true. But it's not. No one by the name of "Rustling" has won a Pulitzer or Peabody award. The photo accompanying Rustling's bio is also displayed on another bogus story on a different site, but this time under the byline " Darius Rubics." The Dubai story was written by "Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers." The Pope Francis story has no byline at all.

What's the support? Many times these bogus stories will cite official - or official-sounding - sources, but once you look into it, the source doesn't back up the claim. For instance, the Boston Tribune site wrongly claimed that President Obama's mother-in-law was going to get a lifetime government pension for having babysat her granddaughters in the White House, citing "the Civil Service Retirement Act" and providing a link. But the link to a government benefits website doesn't support the claim at all.

The banning-the-pledge story cites the number of an actual executive order - you can look it up. It doesn't have anything to do with the Pledge of Allegiance.

Another viral claim we checked a year ago was a graphic purporting to show crime statistics on the percentage of whites killed by blacks and other murder statistics by race. Then-presidential candidate Donald Trump retweeted it, telling Fox News commentator Bill O'Reilly that it came "from sources that are very credible." But almost every figure in the image was wrong - FBI crime data is publicly available - and the supposed source given for the data, "Crime Statistics Bureau - San Francisco," doesn't exist.

Recently, we've received several questions about a fake news story on the admittedly satirical site Nevada County Scooper, which wrote that Vice President-elect Mike Pence, in a "surprise announcement," credited gay conversion therapy for saving his marriage. Clearly such a "surprise announcement" would garner media coverage beyond a website you've never heard of. In fact, if you Google this, the first link that comes up is a Snopes.com article revealing that this is fake news.

Check the date. Some false stories aren't completely fake, but rather distortions of real events. These mendacious claims can take a legitimate news story and twist what it says - or even claim that something that happened long ago is related to current events.

Since Trump was elected president, we've received many inquiries from readers wanting to know whether Ford had moved car production from Mexico to Ohio, because of Trump's election. Readers cited various blog items that quoted from and linked to a CNN Money article titled " Ford shifts truck production from Mexico to Ohio." But that story is from August 2015, clearly not evidence of Ford making any move due to the outcome of the election. (A reminder again to check the support for these claims.)

One deceptive website didn't credit CNN, but instead took CNN's 2015 story and slapped a new headline and publication date on it, claiming, "Since Donald Trump Won The Presidency... Ford Shifts Truck Production From Mexico To Ohio." Not only is that a bogus headline, but the deception involves copyright infringement.

If this Ford story sounds familiar, that's because the CNN article has been distorted before.

In October 2015, Trump wrongly boasted that Ford had changed its plans to build new plants in Mexico, and instead would build a plant in Ohio. Trump took credit for Ford's alleged change of heart and tweeted a link to a story on a blog called Prntly.com, which cited the CNN Money story. But Ford hadn't changed its plans at all, and Trump deserved no credit.

In fact, the CNN article was about the transfer of some pickup assembly work from Mexico to Ohio, a move that was announced by Ford in March 2014. The plans for new plants in Mexico were still on, Ford said. "Ford has not spoken with Mr. Trump, nor have we made any changes to our plans," Ford said in a statement.

Is this some kind of joke? Remember, there is such thing as satire. Normally, it's clearly labeled as such, and sometimes it's even funny. Andy Borowitz has been writing a satirical news column, the Borowitz Report, since 2001, and it has appeared in the New Yorker since 2012. But not everyone gets the jokes. We've fielded several questions on whether Borowitz's work is true.

Among the headlines our readers have flagged: " Putin Appears with Trump in Flurry of Swing-State Rallies" and " Trump Threatens to Skip Remaining Debates If Hillary Is There." When we told readers these were satirical columns, some indicated that they suspected the details were far-fetched but wanted to be sure.

And then there's the more debatable forms of satire, designed to pull one over on the reader. That "Fappy the Anti-Masturbation Dolphin" story? That's the work of online hoaxer Paul Horner, whose "greatest coup," as described by the Washington Post in 2014, was when Fox News mentioned, as fact, a fake piece titled, "Obama uses own money to open Muslim museum amid government shutdown." Horner told the Post after the election that he was concerned his hoaxes aimed at Trump supporters may have helped the campaign.

The posts by Horner and others - whether termed satire or simply "fake news" - are designed to encourage clicks, and generate money for the creator through ad revenue. Horner told the Washington Post he makes a living off his posts. Asked why his material gets so many views, Horner responded, "They just keep passing stuff around. Nobody fact-checks anything anymore."

Check your biases. We know this is difficult. Confirmation bias leads people to put more stock in information that confirms their beliefs and discount information that doesn't. But the next time you're automatically appalled at some Facebook post concerning, say, a politician you oppose, take a moment to check it out.

Try this simple test: What other stories have been posted to the "news" website that is the source of the story that just popped up in your Facebook feed? You may be predisposed to believe that Obama bought a house in Dubai, but how about a story on the same site that carries this headline: " Antarctica 'Guardians' Retaliate Against America With Massive New Zealand Earthquake." That, too, was written by the prolific "Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers."

We're encouraged by some of the responses we get from readers, who - like the ones uncertain of Borowitz's columns - express doubt in the outrageous, and just want to be sure their skepticism is justified. But we are equally discouraged when we see debunked claims gain new life.

We've seen the resurgence of a fake quote from Donald Trump since the election - a viral image that circulated last year claims Trump told People magazine in 1998: "If I were to run, I'd run as a Republican. They're the dumbest group of voters in the country. They believe anything on Fox News. I could lie and they'd still eat it up. I bet my numbers would be terrific." We found no such quote in People's archives from 1998, or any other year. And a public relations representative for the magazine confirmed that. People' s Julie Farin told us in an email last year: "We combed through every Trump story in our archive. We couldn't find anything remotely like this quote -and no interview at all in 1998."

Comedian Amy Schumer may have contributed to the revival of this fake meme. She put it on Instagram, adding at the end of a lengthy message, "Yes this quote is fake but it doesn't matter."

Consult the experts. We know you're busy, and some of this debunking takes time. But we get paid to do this kind of work. Between FactCheck.org, Snopes.com, the Washington Post Fact Checker and PolitiFact.com, it's likely at least one has already fact-checked the latest viral claim to pop up in your news feed.

FactCheck.org was among a network of independent fact-checkers who signed an open letter to Facebook's Mark Zuckerberg suggesting that Facebook "start an open conversation on the principles that could underpin a more accurate news ecosystem on its News Feed." We hope that conversation happens, but news readers themselves remain the first line of defense against fake news.

On our Viral Spiral page, we list some of the claims we get asked about the most; all of our Ask FactChecks can be found here. And if you encounter a new claim you'd like us to investigate, email us at editor@factcheck.org.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fake news is nothing new. But bogus stories can reach more people more quickly via social media than what good old-fashioned viral emails could accomplish in years past.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
8 skimming and scanning techniques to extract information quickly

One of the most efficient techniques to read fast is skimming and scanning. Previewing a text, document or book allows you to grasp the broader picture, get the author's main idea and sketch important concepts.

This technique is a big time saver: think of all the books on your list and imagine being able to extract the key information without having to read the whole book. Previewing is easy to learn and can be combined with other speed reading techniques.

Learning outcome - This tutorial will teach you the concept of skimming and scanning practices to get you started today. It also contains useful resources such as articles, exercises, worksheets or videos. The main goal is to apply skimming and scanning methods to expand knowledge quickly and immediately put it into practice.

Skimming and Scanning - Meaning and Definition

What is scanning?

Scanning is a technique to trigger and extract key information and ideas such as names, numbers, specific facts. Scanning involves moving your eyes quickly down the page, identifying specific words and phrases to find a particular answer or grasp the basic main idea. You can also use it to determine whether a new resource will answer your questions or not. This activity probably takes about 5-10 minutes.

What is skimming?

Skimming will focus on understanding the main idea and concept. It works best with non-fiction material. You won't read anything. You read only what is important to you. You may stop for interesting facts but then quickly continue to skim the book.

Skimming is like browsing a new travel book or moving your finger over a map of a city you wish to travel to. At first, you may spot pictures, read selected snippets of information or identify general areas, landmarks, or highlights. You want to know the bigger picture first before exploring a location in detail. These practices will teach your brain to understand, comprehend and remember a lot faster.

What is previewing?

Previewing is the overall process of gathering information that includes both skimming and scanning as its most proven techniques. It is, furthermore, all about answering these five 'W' questions: Who, Where, What, When, Why. Who relates to people involved. Where relates to the location. What refers to the general idea/topic. When is about the time of an event. Why refers to reasons, analysis. Write down all key facts to remember them later.

Skimming and Scanning - Benefits

Key ideas - Now you know the basic definitions of what skimming and scanning are, let's look at what is in for you when you actually apply the techniques to skim a book. The biggest benefit is certainly understanding the key ideas of a book to decide whether it will actually deliver the information you are after.

Expand knowledge - The second one is the fact that you can use skimming to significantly expand your knowledge without going super deep or reading the whole book. How? The most important learning outcomes can be condensed into the synopsis, chapter summaries, tables or excerpt boxes. Look out for these structures and you will be able to learn a lot within a very short amount of time.

Books are tools - Experienced readers know the main points of the material before they actually start reading. They also use the book as a tool to jot down the key learning outcomes. This approach will also grow your confidence to either skip the book in front of you or to go deep, and also know which level of depth is necessary.

Pace - While skimming and scanning is certainly a fast reading method, I would like you to not judge or use it for the sake of speed alone. Yes, it allows you to go through books quickly, but you won't get anything out of it if you do not put the new knowledge into practice. To enjoy the power of pace, ingrain information into your daily routine straight away. Make it a part of your life. This way, you can learn a lot just through skimming and scanning.

How to Skim and Scan? Best Practice.

You can choose from four major strategies. I will explain them in more detail below.

1. Reading Key Sentences

2. Scan for name and numbers

3. Scan for trigger words

4. Skim small parts of text for key ideas

There is also a fifth technique called novel previewing and is taught by Ron Cole, but this skimming method is different from the steps explained in this post.

To skim and scan a book apply these steps.

Preview the content page

Read the title

Read the back of the book

Read the index

Scan for images

Look for letters in "bold"

Read the chapter names and headlines

Read first sentence of paragraphs

Try spotting tables and graphs

Spot 'conclusion' or 'summary' sections

Jot down key information

Also, look for "thematic sentences". These are key sentences containing a summary of a chapter and will give you an overview of the key learnings of a lengthy section.

4 Skimming and Scanning Strategies

Having outlined the steps above let's get a bit deeper into the major steps separately.

1. Previewing Key Sentences

These sentences can be found at the very beginning of a paragraph, section or chapter. They will often give you a good idea about their context. How does it work?

One idea - Each paragraph usually delivers one idea, though paragraphs may often relate to each other. Once you understand the central idea behind each paragraph block you will quickly get the gist of it. This may aid you in understanding the whole chapter a lot faster.

Find key idea - You can also use a different approach - just look for the applicable information that you require and skip the rest. Another tactic is to read the first and the last sentence of longer paragraphs which may give you a more relevant summary and enable you to pick up the central idea.

Practice - According to my experience, this works like a charm. I never read all the sentences or even the whole chapter. I constantly shift to the following chapter only skimming and scanning the most interesting bits and bites. In the beginning, I found it difficult to remember information, but after a while, it became easier for me to do so. Skim as little as possible and as much as necessary.

2. Scanning Names and Numbers

Numbers and names are present in every text and they narrate details about people, places and concepts. There is no order of getting that information in a text during previewing. However, I often look for the main facts by understanding where and when the story takes place or how many people are involved.

Use a pencil - One of the best ways of scanning for this sort of information is to move your finger or pointer across the page (you can use serpentine style or zigzag) you will notice that you will quickly remember a number or a few names. After that just read the whole text so that you can get a complete picture.

3. Scanning Trigger Words

Paul Scheele taught me this technique when I read his book "Photo Reading". The concept is to preview a text while keeping a lookout for important keywords and jot them down. Mainly you will spot nouns or compounds. Trigger words usually include numbers, names, places and key sentences.

Semantic triggers - This scanning tactic can be used to quickly find answers but to also judge whether the material contains enough in-depth data to answer your research and learning objects. Often you will need to identify semantic keywords or phrases to ensure the material has the right angle or context you require.

4. Reading the Title

Headlines - Reading the title, the content, and the back of the book or text is probably the first thing we do with new material. Many trigger words are automatically revealed through this method. For example, if the title says "Guide to memory techniques" it is unlikely to find information about 'web design' in that book, chapter or section.

Sub-headlines -There are also chapter titles, sub-headlines or titles of tables and graphs that reveal a lot of useful information. These are helpful structures and anchor points you can use to attach your own notes in order to easily review them later.

Skim and Scan - The Framework

We now know the most important concepts and steps of skimming and scanning. Let's zoom out a bit and see how we can implement those steps into a framework that will allow you to organize your reading systematically.

Categorize - Remember, the goal is to get the key data from a book before going through it in detail. You also want to decide whether the material is suitable or useless to reach your goals. According to the author of the " Become a Learning Machine" course, you should label books as to be either Microwave or Oven. Yes, I know, that's weird. But think of Microwave as a fast way to prepare food, and oven as a slow one.

Microwave - These are books, materials or documents that contain technical information, explanations, guidelines or instructions. You are usually not interested in the art of writing here but in the information that will enable you to apply instructions to a real-world problem to solve it. Many non-fiction books fall into this category, and you use them as tools and references you can come back to regularly.

Oven - Baking takes time so does digesting the actual food. This also applies to books that require slow reading and processing to understand their message deeply. Biographies, success stories or life experiences fall into this category. Skimming and scanning help understand the main ideas, but you wish to go deep and read slowly to get the most out of it.

Try it - Pick a few books from your shelf and skim through the table of contents and summaries, then decide in which category it would belong. Remember, books are tools, so do not hesitate to jot down key notes or highlight important parts. It will make it easier to review the material later on.

4 Levels - Another approach you may try is the one Mortimer Adler outlines in his work "How to read a book". He identifies four levels of reading: Elementary, Inspectional, Analytical and Syntopical Reading. Each level goes into more detail. You decide how deep. Skimming and scanning refer to Elementary and Inspectional Reading.

Skimming and Scanning - 5 Exercises, Assignments

Here are 5 assignments allowing you to put the knowledge of this tutorial into practice. It provides exercises to help you skim and scan, summarize and recall information.

1. Summaries. Pick a non-fiction book from your shelf or library that offers some value to you. Read the synopsis, table of contents and chapter summaries. Write down or articulate in one or two sentences the main concept and learning outcome. Could you apply some of the knowledge immediately? Label it as microwave or oven.

2. Key sentence. Use the same or another book you like and read the first sentences or a few paragraphs of a shortish chapter. Now try recalling the main ideas and if possible, think of a suitable call-to-action to ingrain it immediately. Go easy here and practice with easy-to-understand first. Go wild later.

3. Names and numbers. Choose any article containing lots of facts and look for numbers and names in it. When you find a fact or a name, pause for a few seconds and recognize it. You can say the word out loud if you wish. Now start going through the entire material and see if the facts you just found during skimming and scanning reveal themselves as you read.

4. Trigger words. Choose a number of different articles or books. When you have the articles or books ready, start reading the titles, content, back of the book if required and headlines. Simply write down the trigger words and try to stop at words that interest you. Write these words down too, and let them become your trigger words.

5. Taking notes. Get used to taking notes when going through a book. They are tools. Jot down key ideas next to the text in addition to underlining key phrases. Summarize the main idea and write it next to the chapter's title. Add any info to the chapter summaries. Goal: Review quickly after weeks, even years.

Skimming and Scanning - Summary, Conclusion

I hope I could deliver the key principles of best skimming and scanning strategies and spark some enthusiasm to actually try it as well. To me, previewing is a powerful method to quickly reach the low-hanging fruit, which I can enjoy immediately.

Bottom line - Learning isn't about memorizing, extracting information quickly, it is about ingraining the knowledge deeply so it becomes part of your life. Skimming and scanning is one useful technique to extract that knowledge quickly and build strong call-to-action orders.

Freedom - Making skimming books or essays a habit will also strengthen your ability to say 'No', which is the confidence to dismiss and skip types of material as it does not provide any value or enough information to help achieve your goals.

Skimming and Scanning - Best Practice

1. Read the back of the book and the table of contents, index.

2. Skim titles, chapter summaries and preview content page.

3. Read key sentences and paragraphs that trigger special interest.

4. San for names, numbers and trigger words.

5. Skim images, graphs, illustrations and highlighted information.

6. Take brief notes to summarize key ideas and goals.

7. Answer W-questions: Who, Where, What, When, Why or Who.

8. Use a timer for skimming and scanning books, i.e. 10-15 minutes.

9. After skimming, preview whole book in one go.

10. Put knowledge into practice immediately.

Additional resources

How to read chunks of words.
Speed reading software
SlideShare

Enjoy learning! Let us know about your experiences and preferred skimming and scanning tactics.

Please share this post!

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Skimming and Scanning - 4 Strategies | Speed Reading Lounge

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
One of the most efficient techniques to read fast is skimming and scanning. Previewing a text, document or book allows you to grasp the broader picture, get the author's main idea and sketch important concepts.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Get smart about COVID-19 - News Literacy Project

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Test your ability to determine whether this information about COVID-19 is news, opinion or an ad; or is based on evidence or can be verified.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2020, the TFCN focused on fact-checking social media content related to the presidential election and COVID-19. Our national team of teen fact-checkers published 92 fact-checks related to COVID-19 as of Dec. 15.

TFCN fact-checks are unique in that they debunk misinformation and teach the audience media literacy skills so they can fact-check on their own. On average, 86% of respondents polled on the MediaWise Instagram account recently reported they were more likely to fact-check on their own after watching a TFCN fact-check story.

In 2021 this program will expand to produce 30 fact-check videos designed for YouTube. You'll be able to find those on our YouTube channel in January.

Follow @MediaWise on Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, Facebook and YouTube to see new fact-checks posted daily and learn how you can apply to be part of this program.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2020, the TFCN focused on fact-checking social media content related to the presidential election and COVID-19. Our national team of teen fact-checkers published 92 fact-checks related to COVID-19 as of Dec. 15. TFCN fact-checks are unique in that they debunk misinformation and teach the audience media literacy skills so they can fact-check on their own.