Us humans are exploring uncharted lands during the COVID-19 outbreak. People are panic-stricken and strive to receive trusted information about the situation. One major information provider is technology. Technology opens an entire world of information and products, but one must first confirm that these availabilities are reliable. In order to determine if an information site or product should be trusted, three of the questions Stanford suggests to ask oneself are: Are you listening to experts and vulnerable communities? Can you join existing efforts? Can your technology do what you say it’s going to do? These three questions not only help create technology, but can can also be used as help in many other aspects of life.
The first question is to ask if one is listening to experts and vulnerable communities. Anyone at any level of understanding can post information about the pandemic. This raises concerns surrounding the fact of how some sources are not reliable. Experts are trained to provide the truth, and listening to vulnerable communities helps people understand the opinion of those who don’t have a chance to speak. This is why people should listen to experts and vulnerable communities. Listening to trusted individuals and communities is shown to be effective almost everywhere. In today’s world, people are deciding whether to listen to Trump or medical experts for information on COVID-19. The medical experts, such as Dr. Anthony Fauci, are much more reliable, but people still tend to listen to Trump because he is the president and in turn holds higher power. In the movie Contagion, a deadly disease sweeps across the world, infecting millions. A blogger pretends that he has contracted the disease and says how using Forsythia can cure the sickness, but it actually can’t. Many people end up listening to him and “harm” themselves by intaking ineffective chemicals. Listening to trusted and reliable individuals can help in any situation.
The second question to ask is if one can join existing efforts. There are many efforts, each solving separate problems, in action trying to combat the pandemic. By contributing to an existing effort, one can speed up the process. Joining existing efforts is also supported by the concept of strength in numbers. Mark Shields, an american columnist, once said, “There is always strength in numbers.” In the following scenario, strength in numbers denies to how a larger group of people working together can solve a problem faster and better. The slogan for the Warriors was also called “Strength in numbers.” Many different types of people agree a larger populated team means a better team.
The third question is to ask is if one’s technology is performing its advertised tasks. One’s technology should be able to do what it is assumed to do in real life. This is important because it can cause severe distrust if an individual feels lied to. Trust is not something easily forgotten, it is something that is remembered and stays in one’s heart. When a certain technology product is not trusted, it can cause a catastrophic chain reaction. Superstitions about a single bad product can lead to mistrust in an entire company or association. Many people currently relate black men to criminals because of the recent San Jose crimes, but this perspective is absolutely incorrect. An entire race should not be judged just by the wrongdoing of a single individual. If the technology truthfully advertises what is can actually perform, people will use it more, spread the information, and more people can have a better life.
In conclusion, these three questions are crucial in determining the reliability of technology. Listening to experts and vulnerable communities helps people receive the truth. Joining existing efforts is important because of the concept of strength in numbers. Truthfully advertising technology can help engage trust. People should try their best in order to sustain a reliable internet and trustable technological products.