Evaluating online information
Replace quick credibility judgments with a repeatable source-evaluation process.
Start with the claim#
A source is not simply credible or not credible for every purpose. Identify the exact claim and what kind of evidence would support it. Official documentation may be best for a product rule, while a peer-reviewed study may suit a research finding.
Inspect the source#
Check who created it, their relevant role, the publisher, date, scope, and purpose. Look for references you can trace. A professional appearance and confident tone are not evidence.
Read laterally#
Open new tabs to see what reliable independent sources say about the publisher and claim. Trace quotations, images, and statistics to their original context where possible.
Watch for copied consensus#
Several pages may repeat one unsupported source. Independent corroboration means separate evidence or reporting, not many copies of the same statement.
Match freshness#
Some facts are stable; others change quickly. Check dates for laws, prices, office holders, software behavior, and health guidance. An older source may remain useful for history but not current status.
Final decision#
State what the source supports, what remains uncertain, and whether the evidence is strong enough for the consequence of the decision. Higher-stakes claims need stronger verification.
Key points
- Authority depends on the claim and the source's relevant expertise or responsibility.
- Evidence should be traceable and actually support the statement.
- Date and scope determine whether information fits the question.
- Independent corroboration is stronger than many copies of the same unsupported claim.