Today I had a debate in my Media Ethics class about whether or not there are more or less ethics when it comes to the internet. The professor was a little skeptical as to whether the internet was less reliable. For me there is a big difference when it comes to the ethics that are faced within different environments.

The way I see it is that when it comes to the internet, there are no gatekeepers. People are allowed to write about whatever they want. For example take one of the internet’s most popular encyclopedias, Wickipedia. There has been much controversy as to how accurate the information on Wickipedia is. For those of you who are unaware of Wickipedia, it is a free encyclopedia that is available on the web. It covers almost anything and everything, and most cases are accurate. However it has come to the attention of many people that people were starting to write false information.

Like many of you I am sure that you have had you fare share of professors warning you of using the internet to do research. The reality is that no matter how useful the internet is, it will never be viewed as reliable as The New York Times. Don't get me wrong, there is no doubt that newspapers have their fare share of mistakes. However at the end of the day there is a system in place that helps to reduce the amount of false information that gets printed.



While I feel that the internet leaves more room for people to be less ethical, I feel that over time it will develop into a reliable source.

The internet allows people to have access to information at all times, and is extremely useful; however it can be very misleading at times. If used properly, it is one of the best sources available.