"Clearly, the raw volume and velocity of information as well as opportunity for distraction now is unprecedented. But I find the info-overload fears of the past to be instructive in the way they eerily reflect today's moral panics about the putative stupefying effects of the Web, and in the hopeful clue that history conveys-people responded to overload in the past by developing mind tools to elevate the information-handling capacities of literate people."

Very similar to Chris's words in his blog, Digital Redlining, Access, and Privacy This is something can be truly related in the response due to effects that surfing the web can have on you, your ideologies and the topics that you may want to research upon using the internet.

"Some people are exploring the use of social media for crap detection about journalism. FairSpin.org's community votes on stories in order for its aggregate judgments to identify opinion disguised as fact, and reflect the degree of political bias detected in stories from both the Left and Right."

In a political sense, many of the sources from organizational websites can result in bias writing towards a certain ideology. This isn't terrible but it can also leave specific facts from one side due to a organization using favoritism in an argument. Which can also be checked for crap detection just because someone is trying to make their group look better than another.

"If you are going to grant credibility to people whose expertise is based on being a professor of something, make sure that assertion is accurate. Don't stop at simply verifying that the claim to be a professor is valid if you are looking for scientific credibility."

Credibility is something that everyone needs to be checked for even if you are a professor. Rheingold slides in that just because someone is a teacher, doctor, professor or something doesn't mean that they're valid 100% of the time about everything.

"Search engines are such powerful magic that we've forgotten how magical they really are. While people stand in line for hours to pay for the privilege of walking around a fake village full of actors posing as magicians in the Wizarding World of Harry Potter theme park, millions of people use computer and telephone keyboards to utter magical spells-with various degrees of proficiency and success-every day.

The way gathering information back then was reliable mainly because of the fact that you had to read to gather information. Also this was better mainly because of the fact that you had to realize that many books were read over before they were published.

"I'll soon drill down on that "collective intelligence" aspect of credibility testing. The social aspects of critical evaluation can be powerfully useful, but they also can be misleading. Skill at evaluating the quality of collective intelligence is essential to knowing how to take advan- tage of it."

This results in being able to work with peers and other scholars in order to put heads together to find and gather valuable information on a topic. However Rheingold proves this route to be inclusive as to still being able to crap detect by realizing that these sources from your peers may be misleading

"Most people ask themselves whether a detective-like inquiry to verify the answer to a Web search is worth the time. According to researchers Soo Young Rieh and Brian Hilligoss, interviews with twenty-four college stu- dents revealed that they would be willing to compromise certainty about credibility for speed and convenience."

While rheingold provides numbers to his argument of determining how many students ever wonder what sources they are using, there are many students who actually take the route of using sites like google scholar to find their sources which is most cases is better than using a normal cite.

"A study in 2010 by Eszter Hargittai, Lindsay Fullerton, Ericka Menchen-Tre- vino, and Kristin Yates Thomas, found that students use search engines as a parameter of trustworthiness. As long as a site is toward the top of a search engine's listings, many of this study's subjects considered it credible."

Rheingold is backing up his argument with supporting sources from studies in the past. This is very believable even today as students just believe that since a source is at the top of the page when they use the search engine, they deem credible because they believe if it wasn't there would be someone to take it down.

"Treat a site's design not as validation of credibility but instead as one possible clue (along with grammatical errors, suspicious sources or lack thereof, and other people's negative opinions of the site) that could convince you to lower your evaluation of the site's credibility."

The ability to Crap detect and being able to read between the lines is something should be able to do. Rheingold argues that you should not just use website aesthetics as way to find credibility. nevertheless he says it can help as way to see if the article has grammatical errors, suspicious or lack of sources to help you determine where the site stands.

"To show her what I meant, I typed in the name of the civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr. I knew that near the top of the first page of results from most search engines is a link to a site titled "Martin Luther King Jr.: A True Historical Examination."1 It doesn't take long to see that this "true historical examination" presents King as a disreputable character."

More strong evidence as to support Rheingold's argument. If you were to look this up, it is in face very true that you will find a website that actually talks down on Martin Luther King. This is what Rheingold supports as a crap source to prove that the internet can be a mysterious place.

"The first time I saw my daughter use a search engine to research home-work, I explained that in the olden days, you gathered information by going to the library for a book or magazine article. You might disagree with a library book, but you could be somewhat confident that someone checked the author's claims about facts before the book was published."

This is the main argument that Rheingold is trying to make. He explains that reading a book to gather information is more fruitful than gathering it from the internet (also relate-able to Chris's writing due to digital redlining). This is true because of the simple fact that if you click and link and use that information from said website, there is a possibility that you are using a "crap" source. This source is something that can be downplayed as something that may seem true but to find credibility within you must at least look at the author, the one whole typed it.

It seems that there this is a weird portion within this sentence where you go from "-really is who can..."

Once again, amazing job describing what you saw on the quilt. You're giving the reader a great visual image in their head about the subject you are talking about. Good job.

You've made an excellent description of the materials used on the quilt. I enjoyed reading this because it was vivid, easy enough to read yet descriptive enough to please a scholar. Not only that but it was short and sweet without leaving out any wild details.

Although the quotes and the parenthetical citation is respected in this sentence, it could've been more credible if you were to cite back to Sophie Woodward's writing of Material Culture, as we worked on the lesser readings of Haltman in the past.

"The Material Culture this primary source..." seems to be a grammar error, however this can simply become fixed with a small edit. Happens to the best of us.

This was a solid intro, however, the subject of prince Charles marrying princess Diana and Michael Jackson releasing thriller are somewhat off-topic compared to the topic of AIDS. I see what you were trying to accomplish however, it can/may seem confusing to some readers.

To look at a object that you specifically chose and to bring your own interpretation and your own outcome, can lead to opening up new possibilities and new subjects that lead to a deeper understanding of the item. Thereby drawing insight.

This applies to majority of Sophie's writing in Material Culture, as to looking deeply into the significance of the objectified culture. It is not to look at the surface but to look inside and analyze what couldn't and can't be seen.

As the text suggests, There are questions of how Materials can be socialized with culture. The knowing of mere objects and the collaboration of civilization can lead to many historians questions and philosophies being answered or clearing the ideas. The material culture is not only looking at the object but looking at the deeper meaning.

As being suggested, both life and death are such contrasting concepts yet at the same time go hand-in-hand with each other and also open two different ideologies up for discussion. These prime ideologies open up the connections to how culture, material culture and social theory can be explained metaphorically.

As I have also wondered, it is questioned how objects can be "gauged for potential cultural expressiveness", although it is signified in the reading of Material Culture that objects can have meaning along with the culture that is align with it at that time.

Although many objects may be very distinguishing, others can have more of a descriptive background. Not only that but also attaching more significance to a person's livelihood and considers the subject of the object that is involved.

An object may be characterized by their physical characteristics, but it is possible to have a different meaning by paying attention to not only physical characteristics but perhaps, a historical one. Thereby allowing said "gerundial meaning"

This aligns the connections between my analysis and reading of Material Culture by Sophie Woodward, which explains the underlying strong connection that historians have with material culture.

These writings have various connections that both collectively clash and mix with each other that comprehensively bring the subject of deeper meaning between the study of history and the understanding of it as well.

As a college student, I am subject to knowing the depth between the words of the essays that are collectively encased in the volume. This supplemental reading is to allow me to make distinguishing connections with my secondary reading "Material Culture" by Sophie Woodward, which goes into depth with how materials and certain objects can be seen in the world with such a great undertone and description which relates to the Haltman reading

Material culture, as it should, is interpreted as a culture of people and creations. However, the deeper insight into this culture is that in order to be truly immersed you must analyze deeper into the materials that were created and even taking a look into the concept that is objectification. Upon these actions and studies, it is shown that the objects of these time periods and generations are deeply understood. While these stances are seen from a philosophical stand-point, this delves deep into the idea of the people that are intertwined with these materials.

Material culture differs from the standard imagination of culture as a explanation of culture is simply arts or creations of humanity that have been achieved collectively. Material culture is distinctive as it is collected and categorized by generations and specific time periods. Nevertheless material culture can be manifested by any generation at any time.

Material culture is a very defined culture in itself that can be created by anyone. However, this culture is relative to the time period it was created in which concludes that material culture is specific to many different time period. As material culture has been shaped by technology we find obsolete today, there were many examples of technology that however obsolete they are now, they were a prime of their generation(i.e typewriter).

This somber text shows the paralyzing image in your head of the effects of war and famine