Evidence, Not Authority

Abstract

Many online publications offer space for the public to comment on articles. These sections are a window to see readers’ reactions to the article and the subject matter. This paper provides an analysis of comment sections from readers on articles about vaccination. The purpose of the paper is to demonstrate reactions to authority, which leads to recommendations on how libraries might remain credible and trustworthy places to seek information about contested subjects. Vaccination is a contested practice that has received widespread public attention. This study demonstrates an atmosphere of distrust toward government, media, scientific funding, and drug companies. Librarians working with the public should be aware of this charged atmosphere. Locally created portals that include multiple points of view on contentious subjects will help people make important decisions and will demonstrate independence that will increase trust.

This research seeks to answer the following questions framed within the context of online conversation about vaccinations:

Section 1 provides an introduction to the problem from historical and philosophical angles. Section 2 describes the method, 3, the findings, and 4, recommendations.