I just tried this in google to see what would come up and interestingly enough, none of the top results were the ones listed here. The first one was "black on white vans"

"read the Wikipedia article"...

It irritates me so much that his defense team even considered this a sound argument. We as people get tons of information thrown at us daily, good and bad. Its up to us to filter it out, decipher the good from the bad, and ultimately use our own psyche and judgment to shape our character. Sure Dylan Roof may have been exposed to white supremacist propaganda online, but it was his decision to continue the searches, to let the searches inform his violent and disgusting decision to murder black church members and for that, he is fully accountable for his actions.

This is still such a chilling sentence to read out loud.

Well put, honestly I feel like some people look for life advice on google.

Google, RELEASE YOUR SECRETS! ;)

Here's the issue with algorithms, they can categorizing information based on what is known and what can be grouped, but when someone types a "fake story" or otherwise false info into a search engine, the algorithms in place will make an attempt to group this info into a category that it doesn't belong to (hopefully I have a decent understanding of how algorithms work) and this is an issue because when someone receives an answer for a false search, it makes it easier for them to believe the false info.

I think some people, like my mother lol, have genuine faith in many news articles and don't think twice about whether its necessary to vet the source. That's the scary part, some people aren't even trying to be a bad "net citizen", its just hard to believe (especially for older generations) that articles can be posted for the sheer purpose of profit or scam than to actually inform the public.

Its so crazy how much extra work is now required to attain accurate information. We can have a discussion on access regarding this topic too because not everyone has the time to commit to researching the validity of a particular news article. It's hard enough to stay up to date with current events, there's an extra layer of obstacles at play when we have to allocate time and effort into making sure we're up to date on accurate information because of the prevalence of fake news.

I also like that a lot of email platforms filter out these messages in our spam folder. There's also a section on gmail called "important" that acts as a further filter system which I appreciate.

This is a good beginning step. I do think limiting the profit these fake news sites can make will help crack down on them but I agree with @ianikm15, the problem is when multiple people get their hands on these sites and begin to send it to the people they know. This is more of a consumer driven issue though cause I cant't imagine a way Google or Facebook can prevent the sharing of posts.

This is so true. fake news is nothing new, the speed at which it gets across populations is the new phenomena.

Profit seeking motives are a huge culprit for the spread of fake news. It's really hard to figure out who or what to trust as a consumer.

So interesting. My friends and I talk all the time about how randomly things go viral. Posts on twitter made by normal people with less than a 1000 followers can sometimes reach thousands of people in a matter of days; this has always been a concept which has perplexed me!

I think this is what incentivizes people to put fake news above credible information. The drive for "retweets". "likes", "shares", and just general popularity creates this impulse wit users to do whatever necessary to stay relevant on his/her platform. This is of course a huge disservice to the general public who relies on a lot of social media sites for daily information.

This is an interesting point. I think its very easy to believe something that falls in line with the beliefs you already hold. I think people will much more readily accept news that allows them to stay complicit with their bias.

Well stated. The truth often cannot prevail when information outlets are so saturated with fake news reports. Its disheartening to think that even trusted journalistic sources with a long history of credibility are falling under the umbrella of fake news. I think the best way to ensure accuracy in information attained is by diversifying your sources!

Yes, yes, and yes. Transparency is not too much to ask for when it comes to things going into our bodies.

This is a good one. Its like asking politicians to release their tax returns. If they vehemently refuse you know something's up.

Surprise surprise.

This is an especially important point because it shows just how dangerous the lack of oversight on the pharmaceutical industry really is. Bias exists, we know this as readers, but of course the corruption is carried out under the table so no one actually knows which drugs are reliable and which are not. At least not until real life cases of dangerous side effects start to arise, by which point its essentially too late.

this is exactly what I was trying to get at with my earlier annotation where I pointed out how data can say anything you want it to say. This is of course harmful most to consumers, we need to be hyperaware of all the information that exists for anything that is marketed to us; especial regarding medicine since the cost can sometimes be one's life.

There needs to be more oversight (government or otherwise) for how pharma companies market their drugs to consumers.

On the surface this sounds like a great thing, who wouldn't want researches to get as much funding as possible in order to continue finding innovative ways to improve medical care. However, with the amount of corruption and fraud that characterizes this industry, I am very weary that research funding by pharma companies has exceeded what the National Institute of Health spends.

I think this should be illegal. In journalism you're not allowed to pay the people you interview, this is done so that the information presented can be devoid of as much bias as possible and this should be the case for the researchers publishing on these drugs.

This is so ridiculous! The entire pharmaceutical industry has become this huge enterprise centered around maximizing profits rather than producing drugs that can help people. The price of insulin in the United States is many times more expensive than any other developed nation in the world. People are dying because they're having to ration their insulin intake simply because they cannot afford the proper dosage.

In my Econometrics class, we talked a lot about how data can say virtually anything you want it to say. My professor would implore us to be especially vigilant with where we gather information and to make sure to diversity our sources, but honestly, when reputable scientists and publications can publish bogus research like this its really disheartening.

This was very reassuring to read. I'm glad the author can confidently speak to the progress that has been made thus far. There is, however, still a long way to go.

Many women experience this in so many different industries. I know many argue that the gender wage gap is in part due to the fact that many women are less experienced in negotiating salaries. The confidence factor has a lot to do with it!

This is something completely new to me. I did not know this much weight was placed on author order so this was an interesting part to read.

This is the kind of compounding effect I touched on in my previous annotation. A person pursuing a career in academia has to have a few publishing credits under their belt in order to progress in their career. If this individual wants to pursue a tenure track in higher ed. having several published journals is almost imperative, so this inequality is bigger than just the publication world.

This was really nice to read because seldom is this ever the case, I'm glad they found value in the research proposal made by Ms. Jacquet.

This is very well put. There are so many compounding results from getting published and the gender gap that exists with this level of "achievement" manifests in all sorts of arenas.

Stem fields are primarily made up with men. I feel this too in my classes.

I like how Hathcock mentions here the need for recognition of the damages left behind long after the end of colonial rule. A lot of our institutions especially in academia, are rooted in racial authority.

This is a very saddening reality. Only recognizing western work inherently de-values the minds of non-western persons.

This is such a palpable statement. I think a lot of what we consider scholarly conversation is centered around one school of thought, one in which not everyone involved feels represented or even well informed about. I think about how history itself is written by the "victors", and how many important stories are lost to time because a vast majority of people were not afforded the opportunity to voice their truth. Similarly, scholarly discourse can sometimes leave out the topics, figures, or historical events that are important to many but not recognized as much by the writers of our history books. Diversity is important both through the voices in the room, as well as the topics discussed

I do respect the UC system for taking on the risk of losing access to this much information, but in the long run, I do think/hope it will have a positive outcome with more institutions coming together and taking a stand.

Its so important to take a firm stand against unfair practices in any industry but especially in education. I think if enough pressure is put on a company like Elsevier through collective efforts by universities across the board, they will have no choice but to re-evaluate their offer.

This is a fair compromise to reach. Authors should be able to have some autonomy on how they publish their work.

This is a nice end to such an important discussion. I like that the author challenges readers to look into their own implicit basis when it comes to information access, and dares them to ask the tough questions that will hopefully effect change.

I actually love this quote! It's like the author is addressing the big elephant in the room relating to grades and course work. I am always excited when I'm assigned a project that I know will have a lasting impact even after I finish the course. Students are always able to tell if their work will end up in the recycling bin after grades are submitted, and I can speak from experience, its not the biggest motivator to truly invest my all in the work. So yes, lets do work that engages community members, changes institutional structures, or at the very least, is a stepping stone in the direction of impact that can be taken up by the students who come after!

I think its so important to listen to students as they discuss their experience as learners, especially considering the fact that not every one has equal access to information throughout his/her learning process. We can relate this discussion back to issues involving the college application process. Public schools are primarily funded through property taxes, and the amount of funding each school receives directly dictates the kind of resources (information) offered to students. I went to a high school that did not offer free SAT prep-courses while a high school up the road from me did. This school also happened to have higher college acceptance rates and test scores overall. This is only one of a multitude of examples that arise in the discussion of information access and how it contributes to the success of students. The sort of academic priming some students receive from the onset of their schooling invariably puts them at a greater advantage compared to students without access to tutors, or test prep-classes, and this is not to say that these students are in any way at fault for having greater access, I just think the system itself does not create an environment conducive to quality education for all.

When considering this line in the article, I think about the majors we have on campus and their gender breakdown. A few weeks ago, I was surprised to learn that the Philosophy department at Wake has the largest gap in male to female students (with males dominating) and I can imagine how that impacts the way students intake information.

The author of this article does a great job here synthesizing the key issues that surround equal access to information.

It's crazy that this is certainly the case with a lot of the student activism that goes on on Wake's campus. many of the participants are considered juvenile and "asking for too much".

I'm glad this article made note of this issue. It is one that is often left out of the conversations that pertain to social activism.

This line makes me think back to one of the opening lines of this article that said "people in positions of power, I think they believe nothing is going to happen". It is important for students to have support (especially in the form of faculty and staff) so they may be a positive force for change. With enough people collectively making an effort to push for change, change is bound to come!

From my personal experience on Wake's campus I certainly saw a surge in student activism following the 2016 Presidential election. I also noticed a surge in trump supporting rhetoric develop on campus following his election which may in part explain the influx in student activism that I witnessed.

I do not believe grades/evaluations will ever be eliminated, just because it is so engrained in the way the education system works. However, I am in full support of an updated system of evaluating that takes a more holistic approach to assessing a students understanding of material.

This sentence, in essence, captures much of how I view the system of higher education, at least at the undergraduate level. Many students are definitely more engaged in performance than pure learning.

This sentence sounds all too familiar. Skimming readings for the important information that will most likely be on the test is essentially the cookie cutter recipe for success most students follow. There's less of an incentive for students to read for the sake of learning, this could in part be due to the lack of time students have to engage in every assigned reading in depth as well.

I find it hard to imagine school without a system of grading or evaluation. I do think grades are an agent of good when it comes to motivating students to invest the time and energy required for learning material. I guess where it goes wrong is when the numerical score becomes more important than the learning process.

I really like how Bonnie worded the teaching/learning experience. I agree, the digital platform is only a "doorway into the classroom"

I personally would not perform well in this type of learning environment. I believe we learn as much through communication as we do through reading textbooks. A classroom set up that harnesses both the communicative aspects of learning as well as the independent studying would be an optimal learning environment. Furthermore, the communication aspect is not exclusive to face to face interaction. Digital communication is just as effective of a tool.

I have heard from multiple instructors over the course of my college career who have made the argument that LMSs are restricting. It is difficult to see on the student end because we haven't been exposed to anything other than Sakai, but as far as teaching goes, it makes sense for instructors to feel limited by these LMSs.