Week 4- Journal Prompt

How do you judge the value of expertise on the Web? Does it differ from your notion of expertise in face-to-face settings? Why or why not?

I believe I judge expertise on the web based on where the information is found, and how reputable the site is, both in general world terms and in my own experience. Similar to face-to-face settings, if a completely random person not associated with any group presents some information, they have very little creditability if the information is needed to be accurate. That is, if someone claims the stock market in Asia went up or down a certain amount, that information (while important) I don't need to know, so I don't place any value (positive or negative) on the expertise of the speaker.
However, if a police officer in a city I am visiting informs me that a street is closed, he has more value in my mind than another visitor to that city. On the web, if an associate professor of anthropology presents information as part of a museums online presence, that information garners more value than information given from random member of the public.
There is always the situations where the expertise is earned over time. If on a anthropology forums an individuals contributions have been found to be accurate many times over, even if that individual has no "proper" expertise officially given, for me they are source of knowledge that can be valued more than others. Even if someone is an associate professor in a subject, that same person over time can be found to not be reliable.
Both my thinking about this on the web and face-to-face is similar: People earn their value based on either a stated expertise based on the reputation of an established entity, or show their value over time by providing useful and accurate information.