Michael, Shane, Damien, Meaghan (Melissa)

Prior Knowledge:

Michael: No holds barred on the internet…although he has no prior experience visiting hate website, given that there is freedom of speech in what is posted on the internet, there are bound to be disturbing websites on the internet.  An example would be people who say that the Holocaust never happened (Aryan nation)…and what is dangerous about this is that it becomes a seed of thought, and because the media can be manipulated, there will be people who believe a source. 

Shane: I think that Hate on the internet is rampant because there is no consequence because anyone can go on the internet and type “I hate so-and-so” and not be punished for it because it is a faceless medium.  It is easy to say whatever I want because the format is different than a face to face interaction.  Prior knowledge would be that I know of groups of people who hate blond hair, different races and ethnicities, and many more. 

Damien: I like to use websites, because my major is IT and it can be good (the content and the way it is built and accessible).  However, it can be bad because there can be frustration when it’s working properly.  I don’t know of particular hate websites on the internet, but I do know of websites that say that Jesus doesn’t exist, and they show scientific measures to prove it. 

Meaghan: I think it’s an issue of audience and credibility.  I don’t know of any examples of hate groups on the internet, but I’m sure there are groups who exist.  The internet reaches a much larger audience than we can humanly interact with, so unfortunately, there is the potential to spread hate among people who have misguided views.  Norms, rules, and communication styles are different than face to face interaction. 

Criteria/Tools for Review:

CARS method: Credibility (source), Authenticity, Reliability, Support

4 site reviews:

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Holocaust/denial.html   Credibility: The American-Israeli Cooperative Enterprise, and the executive director has a PhD, so we assume he has studied the issue.  Authenticity: We know from primary sources that the Holocaust did occur and there is historical evidence to support this.  Reliability: is high because the organization is a non-partisan organization. Support: documents and testimonials

www.sourcewatch.org Credibility: Not very high because people can voice their opinions; it’s opinion and not factual.  People can talk about what they want to talk about; it is a chat space.  Authenticity: Not very high because it’s a public forum and they don’t screen the contributors.  Reliability and support: Not a highly reliable source, because there is little oversight.

http://Skipdic.com/holocaustdenial.html Credibility: medium because it is for skeptics.  Most people are not going to believe a statement that it didn’t happen.  It is looking at the facts and finding holes in the arguments.  Authenticity:  Their whole purpose is to debunk conspiracy theories.  Reliability: good because they are disproving what the others are saying.  Support: Strong support because there are other related websites with the same information.

http://www.ihr.org/leaflets/denial.shtml  Credibility: Institute for Historical Review. It is highly credible but seeks to refute other lies about history, and the goal is dedicated to restore historical integrity.  Authenticity: The website is giving history of the arguments.  Reliability and support are high because there are references for the article, and there are international news sources who contribute to this website. 

Meaghan: Recorder and facilitator

Michael and Damien: researchers

Shane: Analyst

Melissa (missing from group)