I attended the 2019 LILAC Information Literacy Conference (Twitter hashtag: #LILAC19) at the University of Nottingham on 24-26 April 2019 with my Academic Support Librarian colleague, Donna Watson. This was my first visit to this conference and I was unsure what to expect and to what extent information professionals attending the conference would welcome and engage with discussing Wikipedia and Information Literacy.

However, I was blown away with the level of enthusiasm to discuss this subject – from discussions on Wikipedia’s role in teaching and learning; on open access; on addressing gender bias online and feminist pedagogy in information literacy instruction; to developing our understanding and a definition of data literacy further; to how better to facilitate the dissemination of accurate health information arising from Ruth Carlyle’s excellent keynote; and how to support a more robust critical information literacy when it came to combating ‘fake news’ (misinformation & disinformation) using the IF I APPLY model instead of the CRAAP Test.

I was particularly buoyed, inspired, and grateful for the advocacy and articulacy of Professor Allison Littlejohn’s keynote presentation on how information literacy needs to support innovation in pursuit of social good as it devoted time to discussing Allison’s research into Wikipedia editing and paid tribute to the leadership of Melissa Highton, Assistant Principal at the University of Edinburgh, with the ‘Edinburgh Seven’ Wikipedia editing event in 2015, our very first editathon here at the university, held up as an example of good practice.

NB: If you are interested then ‘Changing the Way Stories Are Told’ – Melissa Highton on the Edinburgh Seven has audio from her presentation at the Wikipedia Science Conference 2015, and a video presentation at the 2017 Physiological Society event).

I have many other highlights from the warm welcome I received over the three days I spent at the University of Nottingham including the conference dinner and disco at Colwick Hall (Lord Byron’s ancestral home apparently); the introduction we received and anecdotes shared on the D.H. Lawrence archival collection; and discussing with Caroline Ball and Jonathan White about their own Wikipedia in the Curriculum project at the University of Derby. Staff and student feedback does seem extraordinarily clear on the benefits of engaging with Wikipedia in teaching and learning over any abstinence-only approach. So it does seem to me that Wikipedia editing events, ‘editathons’, have indeed reached a ‘tipping point’ moment where we can have these conversations about how best to engage across the library and education sectors and beyond.

My presentation, which Donna Watson co-presented with me, is below.

Embedding Wikimedia in the Curriculum

 

Good Morning,

My name is Ewan McAndrew and I work at the University of Edinburgh as the  Wikimedian in Residence. Melissa Highton, our Director of IT at the University was to have been here today to speak about why she wanted a Wikimedian in post but she’s otherwise engaged so I’m delighted my Academic Support Librarian colleague, Donna Watson, has agreed to share her perspective on the residency.

So this presentation asserts that working with Wikipedia in the curriculum helps students to “think critically and make balanced judgements about information. It empowers us as citizens to reach and express informed views and to engage fully with society” (CILIP Information Literacy Group, 2018).

Sound familiar?

Because that’s what we found to be the case over the last three years.

Icebreaker opening:

Can you tell me three words that come to mind when I mention Wikipedia?

Would they be Don’t Use Wikipedia?

Or have we moved away from that into a different way of thinking about Wikipedia?

 

Let’s start with a short video of staff & student reaction to the residency to see if things have moved on.

This is a video submission which was shortlisted for the 2019 LILAC Information Literacy Awards for the work of the Wikimedia Residency at the University of Edinburgh.

 

I have been working at the University of Edinburgh for over 3 years now as the Wikimedian in Residence. It has been something of an experiment, a proof of concept, the first role of its kind in the UK supporting the whole university.

But it has been a successful one. And I’m pleased to see Wikimedian roles at Oxford University, Maynooth University, Coventry University and Wiki work being taken up in unis up and down the country.

My role here today is to explain a little about what I do at the University of Edinburgh and why we think there is a need for all universities and libraries to engage. You can find more about the residency and its work by typing Wikipedia:University of Edinburgh into the search bar of Wikipedia. You can find our 254 videos and video tutorials at tinyurl.com/StudentVids and you can find some ‘need-to-know’ state of the project facts at bit.ly/Wikipedia2019

So this conference is a very timely conference for reflecting on the work we have been doing over the last 3 years. In thinking about how we support developing a more robust critical information literacy. And looking at how to do things differently in a rapidly changing digital world.

”Digital intermediaries such as Google and Facebook are seen as the new powerbrokers in online news, controlling access to consumers and with the potential even to suppress  and target messages to individuals.” (Tambini, 2016)

This is a huge discussion right now. It needs to be. Not least in terms of what value we in higher education, and information professionals in general, place in students, staff and members of the public being conversant with how knowledge is created, curated and contested online and their being conversant with the big digital intermediaries that govern our daily lives. Particularly when one thinks “search is the way we now live”.

“When you turn on a tap you expect clean water to come out and when you do a search you expect good information to come out”

(Swift in Hillis, Petit & Jarrett, 2013)

Beyond this in terms of what value we place on the transparency of knowledge sharing and having somewhere online you can go to orientate yourself on a topic where students, staff and members of the public can all contribute their scholarship for the common good.

Because I take the view that there is a huge & pivotal role for information professionals to play in this discussion. A role based on asserting our values in order to shape the open web for the better.

So I’ll start with a bit of context.

A year ago, Tim Berners-Lee was on Channel 4 News being interviewed about the Facebook and Cambridge Analytica scandal and he said this.

“We need to rethink our attitude to the internet.

It is not enough just to keep the web open and free because we must also keep a track of what people are building on it.

Look at the systems that people are using, like the social networks and look at whether they are actually helping humanity.

Are they being constructive or are they being destructive?”

And he’s later reiterated this point that he feels the open web is at something of a crossroads and could go either way. So I do think that the time has come to talk of many things and consider how the web is working. I quite like these quotes in thinking about the pervasiveness and black box nature of the algorithms and the data gathering going on behind the scenes.

 

So you have these big digital intermediaries acting somewhat like gatekeepers. And you have Wikipedia. The free and open encyclopaedia, just turned 18 years old and the fifth most visited website on the planet. And happily, Sir Tim had cheered up a little by May 2018 when he gave his Turing Award lecture in Amsterdam.

It IS amazing that humanity has produced Wikipedia. And he’s right. That’s my experience of working with Wikipedia. People do feel they are doing something inherently good, and worthwhile in sharing verifiable open knowledge. Today it is the largest collaboratively-built encyclopaedia in history with 49 million articles in roughly 300 languages. Every month, 10 million edits are made in Wikipedia by 250,000 users.

No longer just a “weird community project” or the bane of librarians and scholars. Today, Wikipedia currently ranks among the world’s top 10 sites for scholarly resource lookups. Estimated by Crossref to be in the top five or six referrers to DOIs at least.

Because its content is open-licensed, Wikipedia is extensively used by virtually every platform you use on a daily basis from Google to Youtube to Facebook powering their search & knowledge graph backends. It informs the structure of various ontologies and categories, and it is ingested into Neuro Linguistic Programming & other Machine Learning technologies.

So, in the words of Katherine Maher, the Executive Director of the Wikimedia Foundation..

“It may not be too much of a stretch to consider that Wikipedia today — with all of our imperfections — has gone from being the least trusted source in the room into perhaps among the most. Serving today as a kind of accidental epistemic backbone of the internet“

So for this reason, and many more, at the University of Edinburgh, we felt working with Wikimedia UK was something we could not ignore.

Many have since told us they’d love to host a Wikimedian but they can’t afford to.

Our experience is you can’t afford not to.

Not least because Universities must invest in the development of digital skills for staff and for students. There are so many reports urging universities to pay attention to digital skills. Why? Because it is widely recognised that digital capabilities are a key component of graduate employability. “to support and drive research and innovation throughout the  economy” in order to stay competitive globally.

Universities do invest- some more than others. Some buy Ipads and give them out to students like its a cure-all. Some buy a site-wide license for Lynda.com. My residency is placed alongside our digital skills trainers as a free resource available to anyone at the university and working with free and open projects.

Full disclosure, in case you’re wondering where you get Wikimedians from, I was not born a Wikimedian. Although I am interested in all the things so perhaps I was. My background is in Software Development, English & Media teaching and Information Management and the work we do at the University of Edinburgh draws on all 3 of these aspects. Other Wikimedians in Residence have come from library backgrounds, event management backgrounds and more. I was recruited not for my Wiki skills, which I learnt, but for my teaching background, and the ability to communicate how & why of contributing to the greatest open education resource the world has ever seen.

So what can I tell you about the residency itself?

I can tell you that it started, and has continued, with information literacy and digital skills at its heart. Our IT director, Melissa Highton, was asked what strategies could be employed to help better meet the information literacy and digital skills needs of our staff and students at the university, and how could we better meet our commitment to sharing open knowledge.

Working with Wikimedia ticked all these boxes. If Melissa was here she’d tell you that her view is that universities offer an environment in which Wikipedia can thrive. It has a higher than normal concentration of librarians and information professionals, and networks of people interested in discussing and writing about just about every topic under the sun.

But because the University of Edinburgh is a research-based institution, Professor Allison Littlejohn from the Open University was invited to come along to our first editing event in 2015 to help us make sure there was value in a collaboration with Wikimedia UK and to analyse what was going on in these editing events and what their impact actually was. And what she discovered was that there was indeed genuine formal and informal learning going on at these events and she’s produced two research papers arising from that one event.

The first looked at the formation of networks of practice and social capital through participation in an editathon. Through Allison’s work we learned that activity did not stop after the Wikipedia editing event and participants did see it as an important part of their professional development. The second paper looked at the process of becoming a Wikipedia editor – and how participants felt editing was a form of knowledge activism and helped generate important discussions about how knowledge is created, curated and contested online and how Wikipedia editors can positively impact on the knowledge available to people all around the world and addressing those knowledge gaps. This strong evidence helped the business case once we aligned it with our information literacy and digital skills strategy.

Since then we have never looked back. As the university’s new resource, I could have been twiddling my thumbs or treated as a snake oil salesman but I’ve never been busier, working closely with academic support colleagues, course leaders and student societies. While academia and Wikipedia have something of a chequered history*, as soon as we started discussing the university taking an informed approach to Wikipedia and knowledge sharing online we found we had a lot to talk about. And this is why I’m here today, at an information literacy conference.

So the Wikipedia editing event or ‘editathon’ is a model which has found its tipping point moment. Things obviously happen slowly in higher education, but once those key people have been introduced to how rewarding an editathon can be, they are increasingly hosting them themselves.

Our experience at Edinburgh is that there are enough people who get it and been excited & motivated to run with it that we have quickly generated real examples of technology enhanced learning activities appropriate to the curriculum which can be embedded in all sorts of disciplines.  Here are a few which have been run multiple times.

WTF here means “what teaching fun” as opposed to the other WTF that perhaps reflected historic attitudes.

Because that’s what Wikipedia is about – making connections, building on prior learning, using digital research skills and wiki-linking from one subject to another, disappearing down the rabbit hole of knowledge. And that’s what the residency has been about, delivering workshops and creating resources which allow colleagues across the whole university to see the connections between their work and the work of the Wikimedia projects.

As such we have now created a network of Open Knowledge nodes. Both students and staff feel empowered and motivated to suggest collaborations.

Jemima (pictured above here) is an undergraduate at the School of Law and she suggested and lead an editing event for Law students.  As a result of her enthusiasm, we’ve been discussing with her course leaders which year group we should work with in the Law school – postgraduate, undergraduate, or both – because supporting digital research skills and the ability to communicate the law, medicine, what have you, and “world leading research” more generally, in an accessible lay way is absolutely something we as a university should be looking to do.

We find that when we work with a colleague in one discipline this can often lead to further collaborations and other colleagues being brought in and other disciplines. The number of positive quality interactions that a collaboration with Wikimedia affords makes, I think, working in this space the most exciting in academia right now, because it is so emergent but it also has so much potential to make, and I’m quoting the university’s mission here: a really “significant, sustainable and socially responsible contribution to the world”.

To make it work, I’m supported on all sides by a growing number of people all passionate for the sharing of Open Knowledge. There’s our IT Director Melissa, and Anne-Marie her deputy. Our Open Education team, our academic support librarians. The team at Wikimedia UK, course leaders from years one and two. An ever growing number of Wikimedians in Residence. And, latterly, Mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, was tweeting his support of Wikimedia UK recently too.

So far from Wikipedia being anathema in academic contexts. It really is a case of “if you build it they will come”.

 

And it grows over time. Planting the seed and watching it grow.

Of the in-curriculum work we have done – all of these courses have been repeated because of the positive reactions of staff and students. And we’re adding to these with workshops in Digital Sociology MSc, Global Health MSc, Data Science for Design MSc, Korean Studies MSc.

I’ll pass over to my academic support librarian colleague, Donna Watson, now to speak more on this and her experience & perspective.

The Academic Support Librarian perspective on engaging with Wikipedia:

My colleague Ruth Jenkins assists with the Reproductive Biology sessions, and this was her experiences of the process of learning and then helping to host sessions. As Ruth points out- everyone is already using it. The ‘Just say No’ approach has not worked. So do we ignore it or help students understand how to use it to best effect- understanding the pros and cons.

The journey from not knowing how to do (or even thinking it was a good idea to learn) is something I can completely agree with. Editing during the teaching sessions has developed to publishing for fun- I have yet to reach that stage, but an article about the Hob Hole pumping station in Lincolnshire is on my list!

I have, like Ruth, helped to prepare editathons and offered help to others during sessions- a steep learning curve, but we have Ewan there to help us help others. It is great CPD!

We took the Editathon to the EAHIL 2018 conference and the feedback was very positive. Ewan unfortunately couldn’t come with us but we had great help from the National Wikimedian from the national Library of Wales- Jason Evans. The wiki community is really supportive

So why my colleagues and I see using Wikipedia as useful

1. It is familiar to people so more acceptable to use.
2. It is easy to use and access- not like some databases or catalogues.
3. Many students will enjoy the sessions as it is slightly different- some will feel more tentative.

What I see is gained:

Using Wikipedia in teaching, I’m not saying it gives you everything that other tasks would not, but I see it as a tool in the arsenal of techniques that should be available when teaching. My thought come from a healthcare perspective, but are applicable to other areas of study.

You use the same research techniques as you would when doing work in a more traditional format. It allows attendees to an opportunity to develop their research skills, which is paramount in many subjects. I have had to use material I would not usually use- for example newspapers, historical texts. This is the same for session attendees- exposing them to a wide range of literature formats, building searches, using a variety of resources, problem solving where to find literature, seeing how different resources allow searching. All of this is good practice.

I am aware that Wikipedia has been used to help find keyword or phrases for search strategies.

Once you have performed the research you need to be able to discern the relevant points and summarise these- EFFECTIVELY. The guidelines Wikipedia give means this is really important. Understanding the style of writing formally for an encyclopaedia is sometimes different to how you might write an essay or email. Picking out relevant points and knowing they should be backed up requires decision making on behalf of the writer.

As the output is for the general public it means the way the summary is written should be in plain understandable language. We need to move beyond the technical jargon and make what is said accessible and understandable to all. My thoughts are that for medics this is especially important and can help them realise what they will need to consider when conversing with patients.

One of the backbones of Wikipedia is the referencing- articles must reference thoroughly- backing up the findings and allowing others to follow the path that lead to the finished article. It also can show how to use Wikipedia for your own research- by citation tracking.

Copyright compliance is important and Wikipedia is strong on this. Learning about licenses can help in other areas work. Images and copyright can always be problematic and the access you get to licensed images is very helpful.

Producing a Wikipedia page means for many learning new skills and for the first time putting material out to the wider world. Other text based ways of teaching do not always offer the opportunity to learn technical skills and undergo a digital stretch. Healthcare professionals are having to develop their digital skills in order to enter an ever evolving landscape in the NHS. Telemedicine, e-prescribing, robotic surgery are but a few of the reasons why having a high level of digital skills is important. Putting an opinion out for public scrutiny can be daunting- but training as a healthcare professional often means putting your opinion out for all to hear and see- from patients and colleagues.

The digital stretch is not only for session attendees, but also for the trainers. I had to build my skills so I could assist others not just do my own work. The amount of work that goes into setting up a session should not be underestimated- thanks go to Ewan. So everyone has the opportunity to upskill their digital assets.

Lastly during the research and writing up stage you start to critically assess the validity and reliability of the sources you use. Ensuring the output is balanced (lacks bias), relevant, evidence based and inclusive- all important parts of the process. This can be a good place to start the critical thinking process.  

So bringing it back to the CILIP information literacy statement: “The ability to think critically and make balanced judgements about any information we find and use. It empowers us as citizens to reach and express informed views and to engage fully with society.”

I think Wikipedia can help achieve these aspects.

[Donna handed back to myself to continue presenting at this point.]

 

In the field of medicine our best estimates indicate that the nearly 200,000 articles about health & medical topics accessed on desktop across over 200 Wikipedia languages… attract more traffic than the US National Institutes of Health websites, or WebMD.

Contributing accurate up-to-date health information is therefore vitally important. Wikipedia played a major role in providing access in local languages on medical information on Ebola, extracted from often paywalled literature, during the 2014 outbreak in West Africa. Receiving more local readership than CDC, CNN and WHO.

 

“Of course, if it’s on Wikipedia it must be true” is sometimes scoffed. But that makes me a little cross when you think of volunteers giving up their time to scrupulously research and share open knowledge for the benefit of the world. There are some excellent articles on Wikipedia. I know because our students and staff helped create and improve them. There are also some missing articles and some needing lots of improvement. Wikipedia is always going to be a work in progress but if everyone contributed even a little then would be an even more amazing resource than it is today.

By way of example of our work with students, Reproductive Biology Hons. student, Áine Kavanagh scrupulously researched an article on one of the most serious and most deadly forms of ovarian cancer, high grade serous carcinoma, backing up her work with over sixty references and creating her own openly-licensed diagram in Photoshop to help illustrate the article. The article has now been viewed over 60,000 times since 2016, addressing a serious knowledge gap with scholarly research. Áine benefited from the practice academically and she enjoyed doing it personally. Because her scholarship is published, lasting long beyond the assignment and doing something for the common good. Lots of the students see that as the main benefit of engaging with Wikipedia and are enthusiastic to help because of this.

The reason being: “Search is the way we live now”.

Google and Wikipedia have been shown to have something of a symbiotic relationship where they depend on one another. Google is the #1 search engine and Wikipedia is the go-to information site, powering Google’s Knowledge Graph. So because Wikipedia pages are given a high ranking by Google’s algorithm, there is real agency to Wikipedia editing which our editors find inspiring. They become knowledge activists.

And it’s never been easier to contribute because of the new Visual Editor interface and all the little fun things you can do to add images, links and more –learning through play, particularly citations which autogenerate from a url, stable DOI, Pubmed IDs or ISBN numbers –– while it’s also never been harder to vandalise because of the increased checks & balances put in place.

University of Glasgow researchers published research last year which found that:

“Preliminary analysis reveals (∼90%) of the vandalism or foul edits are done by unregistered users… community reaction seemed to be immediate: most vandalisms were reverted within 5 mins on average” –  Alkharashi, A. and Jose, J. (2018)

We also do need to talk about diversity. Gender inequality in science and technology is real.

We host Women in Red editing events every single month – where we turn red-linked articles about notable women which don’t yet exist into blue clickable ones that do. This has motivated many to become involved with 69% of our attendees being women. Bucking Wikipedia’s normal 10% average. Creating pages and increasing the visibility of inspirational female role models online that can also help inform and shape our physical environments to inspire the next generation. You can’t be what you can’t see.

There is now a commitment to keep this going in ten disciplines for the next four years written into our Athena Swan plan to inspire more women to enter STEM fields. Higher Education shares addressing gender inequality with Wikipedia. It is not enough to say that the world of Wikipedia- and science in general- is ‘neutral and fact driven’ and thus free from bias.

Representation matters.

Diversity matters.

This has been a key part and a key motivator during the residency to date.

Students on the World Christianity MSc were motivated to make the subject of World Christianity much less about White Northern hemisphere perspectives and created articles on Asian Feminist Theology, Sub-Saharan Political Theology and more. Students on the Translation Studies Masters similarly have been motivated for the last 3 years to gain meaningful published practice ahead of the world of work by sharing knowledge from one language Wikipedia to another. We’ve also hosted events for LGBT History Month, Black History Month and celebrated Edinburgh’s Global Alumni.

But it’s not just Wikipedia. The implementation of Wikidata in the curriculum, Wikipedia’s sister project, presents a massive opportunity for student learners, educators, researchers, repository managers and data scientists alike. Especially when there is a pressing need to meet the demands of our digital economy for developing a data literate workforce.

“A common critique of data science classes is that examples are static and student group work is embedded in an ‘artificial’ and ‘academic’ context. We look at how we can make teaching data science classes more relevant to real-world problems. Student engagement with real problems—and not just ‘real-world data sets’—has the potential to stimulate learning, exchange, and serendipity on all sides, and on different levels: noticing unexpected things in the data, developing surprising skills, finding new ways to communicate, and, lastly, in the development of new strategies for teaching, learning and practice“.Corneli, J, Murray-Rust, D & Bach, B 2018, Towards Open-World Scenarios: Teaching the Social Side of Data Science.

A Wikidata assignment, of the kind we have done over the last two years on the Data Science for Design MSc, allows students to develop their understanding of, and engagement with, issues such as: data completeness; data ethics; digital provenance; data analysis; data processing; as well as making practical use of a raft of tools and data visualisations. The fact that Wikidata is also linked open data means that students can help connect to & leverage from a variety of other datasets in multiple languages; helping to fuel discovery through exploring the direct and indirect relationships at play in this semantic web of knowledge.

This real-world application of teaching and learning enables insights in a variety of disciplines; be it in open science, digital humanities, cultural heritage, open government and much more besides. Wikidata is also a community-driven project so this allows students to work collaboratively and develop the online citizenship skills necessary in today’s digital economy.

And it’s all free. Wikimedia’s suite of open knowledge projects are all free, open and powered by volunteers around the world, giving of their free time and passionate to share open knowledge with the rest of the world for the benefit of the world.

So there is lots to talk about in terms of Wikimedia in education… not least in developing the skills and experiences we want to see our students come out with, in terms of collaborative working, digital research and developing a critical information literacy, and I really like this quote from a paper on developing Political Literacy, which came out of a project at the University of Strathclyde Library to support political literacy during the 2014 Scottish Independence Referendum.

“The challenge is not just for school librarians to prepare the next generation to be informed but for all librarians to assist the whole population.”  Abram, 2016. Political literacy can be learned.

Only I think this challenge is too big, too vitally important, to leave solely in the lap of librarians when higher education, and education as a whole, can play a central and pivotal role here too.

Lots to talk about. But we need to be talking. Our staff and students are clear, we can’t go on pretending Wikipedia does not have SO MUCH to offer in teaching and learning. We need to consider how well the open web is working, how we can best support developing a critical information literacy, and how well this current abstinence-only approach has served us. Especially when there is a great love affair between Wikipedia and Education in the offing.

And yes, I am comparing Anthony Hopkins in Remains of the Day to the (hopefully) historic abstinence-only approach when thinking of Wikipedia in education.

If you’re interested we have produced interviews and video tutorials at tinyurl.com/WikiHopper and resources at tinyurl.com/timeforopen.

As to the future, we are publishing our first booklet of case studies of UK examples of Wikipedia in the Classroom which include numerous examples from the University of Edinburgh along with case studies of Wikipedia in secondary education as part of the Welsh Baccalaureate and Jewish Studies MSc students at the University of Glasgow collaboratively researching, writing  & illustrating the Wikipedia article on the Garnethill Synagogue. So there are many opportunities for secondary schools, universities, and libraries to benefit from and contribute to the knowledge available online through Wikimedia’s free and open projects.

Shaping the open web for the better, constructively.

Many Thanks

Ewan McAndrew, Wikimedian in Residence at the University of Edinburgh, 26 April 2019.

ewan.mcandrew@ed.ac.uk

 

Footnote

 

* Everything about Wikipedia is relentlessly transparent so here is its ‘warts & all’ history: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Wikipedia

Danah Boyd also wrote some articles back in 2005 on academia & wikipedia which make for interesting reading… if for nothing other than Jimmy Wales’s ‘Wikipedia as steakhouse’ analogy which deserves to be read:

• http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2005/12/14/wikipedia_acade.html …
• http://www.zephoria.org/thoughts/archives/2005/01/04/academia_and_wikipedia.html …

Danah also wrote an article entitled Did Media Literacy backfire? last year which has a very pertinent point to the discussion of Wikipedia in academic contexts:

“Too many students I met were being told that Wikipedia was untrustworthy and were, instead, being encouraged to do research. As a result, the message that many had taken home was to turn to Google and use whatever came up first. They heard that Google was trustworthy and Wikipedia was not.”

How useful has this approach been to date?

Bibliography

Abram, S. (2016). Political literacy can be learned! Internet@Schools, 23(4), 8-10. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1825888133?accountid=10673

Alcantara, Chris (2016).“Wikipedia editors are essentially writing the election guide millions of voters will read”. Washington Post. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Ashok, India (2016-11-18). “UK passes Investigatory Powers Bill that gives government sweeping powers to spy”. International Business Times UK. Retrieved 2016-12-11.

Blumenthal, Helaine (2016).“How Wikipedia is unlocking scientific knowledge”. Wiki Education Foundation. 2016-11-03. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Boyd, Danah (2017-01-05). “Did Media Literacy Backfire?”. Data & Society: Points. Retrieved 2017-02-01.

Broeders, Dennis (2016-04-14). “The Secret in the Information Society”. Philosophy & Technology. 29 (3): 293–305. doi:10.1007/s13347-016-0217-3. ISSN 2210-5433.

Cadwalladr, Carole (2016-12-11). “Google is not ‘just’ a platform. It frames, shapes and distorts how we see the world”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2016-12-12.

Carlo, Silkie (2016-11-19). “The Government just passed the most extreme surveillance law in history – say goodbye to your privacy”. The Independent. Retrieved 2016-12-11.

Chaudhry, Peggy E. “The looming shadow of illicit trade on the internet”. Business Horizons. doi:10.1016/j.bushor.2016.09.002.

Clarke, C. (2016). Advertising in the post-truth world. Campaign, Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1830868225?accountid=10673

Davis, Lianna (2016-11-21). “Why Wiki Ed’s work combats fake news — and how you can help”. Wiki Education Foundation. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Dewey, Caitlin (2016-05-11). “You probably haven’t even noticed Google’s sketchy quest to control the world’s knowledge”. The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Dewey, Caitlin (2015-03-02). “Google has developed a technology to tell whether ‘facts’ on the Internet are true”. The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Duggan, W. (2016, Jul 29). Where social media fails: ‘echo chambers’ versus open information source. Benzinga Newswires Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1807612858?accountid=10673

Eilperin, Juliet (11 December 2016). “Trump says ‘nobody really knows’ if climate change is real”. Washington Post. Retrieved 2016-12-12.

Evans, Sandra K. (2016-04-01). “Staying Ahead of the Digital Tsunami: The Contributions of an Organizational Communication Approach to Journalism in the Information Age”. Journal of Communication. 66 (2): 280–298. doi:10.1111/jcom.12217. ISSN 1460-2466.

Facts and Facebook. (2016, Nov 14). Mint Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1838637822?accountid=10673

Flaxman, Seth; Goel, Sharad; Rao, Justin M. (2016-01-01). “Filter Bubbles, Echo Chambers, and Online News Consumption”. Public Opinion Quarterly. 80 (S1): 298–320. doi:10.1093/poq/nfw006. ISSN 0033-362X.

Fu, J. Sophia (2016-04-01). “Leveraging Social Network Analysis for Research on Journalism in the Information Age”. Journal of Communication. 66 (2): 299–313. doi:10.1111/jcom.12212. ISSN 1460-2466.

Graham, Mark; Straumann, Ralph K.; Hogan, Bernie (2015-11-02). “Digital Divisions of Labor and Informational Magnetism: Mapping Participation in Wikipedia”. Annals of the Association of American Geographers. 105 (6): 1158–1178. doi:10.1080/00045608.2015.1072791. ISSN 0004-5608.

Grathwohl, Casper (2011-01-07). “Wikipedia Comes of Age”. The Chronicle of Higher Education. Retrieved 2017-02-20.

Guo, Jeff (2016).“Wikipedia is fixing one of the Internet’s biggest flaws”. Washington Post. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Hahn, Elisabeth; Reuter, Martin; Spinath, Frank M.; Montag, Christian. “Internet addiction and its facets: The role of genetics and the relation to self-directedness”. Addictive Behaviors. 65: 137–146. doi:10.1016/j.addbeh.2016.10.018.

Heaberlin, Bradi; DeDeo, Simon (2016-04-20). “The Evolution of Wikipedia’s Norm Network”. Future Internet. 8 (2): 14. doi:10.3390/fi8020014.

Helberger, Natali; Kleinen-von Königslöw, Katharina; van der Noll, Rob (2015-08-25). “Regulating the new information intermediaries as gatekeepers of information diversity”. info. 17 (6): 50–71. doi:10.1108/info-05-2015-0034. ISSN 1463-6697.

Hillis, Ken; Petit, Michael; Jarrett, Kylie (2012). Google and the Culture of Search. Routledge. ISBN9781136933066.

Hinojo, Alex (2015-11-25). “Wikidata: The New Rosetta Stone | CCCB LAB”. CCCB LAB. Retrieved 2016-12-12.

Holone, Harald (2016-12-10). “The filter bubble and its effect on online personal health information”. Croatian Medical Journal. 57 (3): 298–301. doi:10.3325/cmj.2016.57.298. ISSN 0353-9504. PMC 4937233. PMID 27374832.

The information age. (1995). The Futurist, 29(6), 2. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/218589900?accountid=10673

Jütte, Bernd Justin (2016-03-01). “Coexisting digital exploitation for creative content and the private use exception”. International Journal of Law and Information Technology. 24 (1): 1–21. doi:10.1093/ijlit/eav020. ISSN 0967-0769.

Kim, Jinyoung; Gambino, Andrew (2016-12-01). “Do we trust the crowd or information system? Effects of personalization and bandwagon cues on users’ attitudes and behavioral intentions toward a restaurant recommendation website”. Computers in Human Behavior. 65: 369–379. doi:10.1016/j.chb.2016.08.038.

Knowledge, HBS Working. “Wikipedia Or Encyclopædia Britannica: Which Has More Bias?”. Forbes. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Korjus, Kaspar. “Governments must embrace the Information Age or risk becoming obsolete”. TechCrunch. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Landauer, Carl (2016-12-01). “From Moore’s Law to More’s Utopia: The Candy Crushing of Internet Law”. Leiden Journal of International Law. 29 (4): 1125–1146. doi:10.1017/S0922156516000546. ISSN 0922-1565.

Mathews, Jay (2015-09-24). “Is Hillary Clinton getting taller? Or is the Internet getting dumber?”. The Washington Post. ISSN 0190-8286. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Mims, C. (2016, May 16). WSJ.D technology: Assessing fears of facebook bias. Wall Street Journal Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1789005845?accountid=10673

Mittelstadt, Brent Daniel; Floridi, Luciano (2015-05-23). “The Ethics of Big Data: Current and Foreseeable Issues in Biomedical Contexts”. Science and Engineering Ethics. 22 (2): 303–341. doi:10.1007/s11948-015-9652-2. ISSN 1353-3452.

Naughton, John (2016-12-11). “Digital natives can handle the truth. Trouble is, they can’t find it”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2016-12-12.

Nolin, Jan; Olson, Nasrine (2016-03-24). “The Internet of Things and convenience”. Internet Research. 26 (2): 360–376. doi:10.1108/IntR-03-2014-0082. ISSN 1066-2243.

Proserpio, L, & Gioia, D 2007, ‘Teaching the Virtual Generation’, Academy Of Management Learning & Education, 6, 1, pp. 69-80, Business Source Alumni Edition, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2016.

Rader, Emilee (2017-02-01). “Examining user surprise as a symptom of algorithmic filtering”. International Journal of Human-Computer Studies. 98: 72–88. doi:10.1016/j.ijhcs.2016.10.005.

Roach, S 1999, ‘Bubble Net’, Electric Perspectives, 24, 5, p. 82, Business Source Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2016.

Interfax (2016). Putin calls for countering of monopoly of Western media in world. Interfax: Russia & CIS Presidential Bulletin Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1800735002?accountid=10673

Seetharaman, D. (2016). Mark Zuckerberg continues to defend Facebook against criticism it may have swayed election; CEO says social media site’s role isn’t to be ‘arbiters of truth’. Wall Street Journal (Online) Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1838714171?accountid=10673

Selinger, Evan C 2016, ‘Why does our privacy really matter?’, Christian Science Monitor, 22 April, Academic Search Premier, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2016.

Sentance, Rebecca (2016). “Everything you need to know about Wikimedia’s ‘Knowledge Engine’ so far | Search Engine Watch”. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Smith, L.N. (2016). ‘School libraries, political information and information literacy provision: findings from a Scottish study’ Journal of Information Literacy, vol 10, no. 2, pp.3-25.DOI:10.11645/10.2.2097

Sinclair, Stephen; Bramley, Glen (2011-01-01). “Beyond Virtual Inclusion – Communications Inclusion and Digital Divisions”. Social Policy and Society. 10 (1): 1–11. doi:10.1017/S1474746410000345. ISSN 1475-3073.

Soma, Katrine; Onwezen, Marleen C; Salverda, Irini E; van Dam, Rosalie I (2016-02-01). “Roles of citizens in environmental governance in the Information Age — four theoretical perspectives”. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability. Sustainability governance and transformation 2016: Informational governance and environmental sustainability. 18: 122–130. doi:10.1016/j.cosust.2015.12.009

Stephens, W (2016). ‘Teach Internet Research Skills’, School Library Journal, 62, 6, pp. 15-16, Education Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2016.

Tambini, Damian; Labo, Sharif (2016-06-13). “Digital intermediaries in the UK: implications for news plurality”. info. 18 (4): 33–58. doi:10.1108/info-12-2015-0056. ISSN 1463-6697.

“A new kind of weather”. The Economist. 2016-03-26. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved 2016-12-10.

Toobin, Jeffrey (29 September 2014). “Google and the Right to Be Forgotten”. The New Yorker. Retrieved 2016-12-11.

Tuffley, D, & Antonio, A 2016, ‘Ethics in the Information Age’, AQ: Australian Quarterly, 87, 1, pp. 19-40, Political Science Complete, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2016.

Upworthy celebrates power of empathy with event in NYC and release of new research study. (2016, Nov 15). PR Newswire Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.is.ed.ac.uk/docview/1839078078?accountid=10673

Usher-Layser, N (2016). ‘Newsfeed: Facebook, Filtering and News Consumption. (cover story)’, Phi Kappa Phi Forum, 96, 3, pp. 18-21, Education Source, EBSCOhost, viewed 10 December 2016.

van Dijck, Jose. Culture of ConnectivityA Critical History of Social Media – Oxford Scholarship. doi:10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199970773.001.0001.

Velocci, A. L. (2000). Extent of internet’s value remains open to debate. Aviation Week & Space Technology, 153(20), 86. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/206085681?accountid=10673

Viner, Katherine (2016-07-12). “How technology disrupted the truth”. The Guardian. ISSN 0261-3077. Retrieved 2016-12-11.

Wadhera, Mike. “The Information Age is over; welcome to the Experience Age”. TechCrunch. Retrieved 2016-12-12.