Accepting or Refusing Free Information

My last post was about free information and the way a few websites attempted to convince the audience of their side. Should we trust free information? Or is this a way of luring the innocent into bear traps?

To start, we must ask a few questions:

1. What is the source arguing?

2. How is the author arguing his point?

3. Can I trust the source?

For the first question, both sources fall into two basic categories: supporting the point or opposing the point. As for the second question, freeinfosociety.com has multiple authors with multiple ideas, but they are all driven by the same goal: Information is meant to be shared, and they will do what they can to make skeptics see this goal. Their rhetorical devices are much harder to find because it isn’t a formal argument, but they’re there. The website itself allows the viewers to become part of an “everyman” identity (the everyman being the quintessential human being that represents the triumphs and struggles of the common people).

Because of these criteria, both sources can be trusted, especially with the format and structure of their arguments. Either one shows us new things about the same topic, and illustrates its points in a way that’s easy to understand. There’s so much to learn out in the world that nothing we learn is ever a waste, but rather just a tiny part of our identities. Sources like these invite us to continue our education, long after high school is over.

Free or not free, I couldn’t ask for a better education from both of these sources, because they have challenged me and expanded my views in every way possible.

Free Information

With the growing popularity of the concept of “free information,” boundaries are being set- or in some cases, ignored- all across the country. “Free information” refers to the idea that all information, from academic research to government records, should be shared.. D-Lib, an online magazine, recently published an article discussing the negative effects of an argument like this. In order to elaborate this point, the author, Richard T. Kaser, often uses rhetorical devices. He opens the article with a strong ethos- explaining the sources he has used to make him more of an authority on the subject. This illustrates his willingness to not only show his character and authority as a writer, but willingness to show credit where it is due. Throughout the article, he sprinkles in dabs of pathos, with a dash of humor regarding his dog, Fido. Humor, as well as general emotions in an article, is appealing to an audience, and works especially well here. Lastly, Kaser’s use of logos is the most masterful of all: he explains what he believes in an easy and step-by-step fashion. This helps his audience better understand the topic, and more importantly, allows them to side with him by the end of the article.

After more intense browsing, I found a website that invites people to share any information they have about any topic. Freeinfosociety.com had a host of different ideas and different kinds of information, about everything from Stephen Hawking to John Wayne. I was surprised to see that unlike other sites edited by the users, the authors of the site were voraciously enthusiastic about their topics. Through their biographies and studies of all kinds, I noticed their rhetorical devices as well- they demanded to be listened to (ethos) and they were logical in their approach (logos).

In case you’re interested, here are the sites. See for yourself what all the fuss is about- and see if you agree information doesn't come with a cost. 

http://www.dlib.org/dlib/may00/kaser/05kaser.html

http://www.freeinfosociety.com/article_index.php