I think there are 2 equally difficult CRAAP Test criteria for people to judge, that would be Authority and Accuracy. The reason I feel like these 2 are equal is because they kind of go hand in hand. Authority is difficult because anyone can make information look believable. Especially if they have an about author section with misinformation. For example if someone uses the word doctor in front of their name, it may seem like they are reliable. This could be false information and therefore lead the person researching information in the wrong direction. If someone added this to their credibility most people wouldn’t dig any farther into the authors real expertise. Therefore giving authority to someone who doesn’t know anything about the subject. Accuracy is also a difficult criteria for people to judge. The reason this is difficult is because there is a lot of information out there about a ton of different topics and verifying everything is very time consuming. There are also people who are still trying to discover or prove facts wrong, so there may be a lot of information that is contradicting other information depending on what articles you have found. Besides that misinformation can be very subtle, especially with how technology can make corrections when people are typing. If the information gets changed and the author misses it that can also lead to misinformation. For those reasons its important to cross check sources, and honestly thats where Authority and Accuracy relate. When cross checking information you have to not only figure out accurate information but you also have to decide which person has more correct knowledge on the subject.

I believe that a source can be misleading and still meet all the CRAAP Test standers. A website could be current to their information, have good sources, facts, real professional sources, and maybe the journalist writing this story was there. However having this information still may be misleading if the journalist only has one side of the story, new information was released that they were unaware of, or  if their was I small amount of biases written by a professional that the journalist missed because of how reliable the source is.

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 9th, 2025 at 9:19 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.