Jonathan Marks October 28th, 2012 CAS 137H Section 18 Professor Lori Bedell The Internet: A Paradigm Shift

t in Information Retrieval To this day, my parents still tell childhood tales of the encyclopedia salesmen who once traveled door-to-door selling their wares. Professionally attired and accoutered with all manner of enlightening tomes, they offered portable wisdom for a comparatively small monetary investment. The sets, I am told, required a sturdy bookcase, yearly updates, and were the primary source for many a school report. But after 244 years of peddling hard-copy edification, the Encyclopedia Britannicaand its now extinct merchantswent digital. A simple click of a mouse, granting access to nearly infinite reservoirs of information, rendered such antiquated methods obsolete. The Internet changed how individuals viewed information retrieval by advancing informative independence, facilitating rhetorical invention, and eroding personal privacy. The Internet shifted attitudes toward information retrieval from dependence to autonomy by challenging the librarys role as the primary source of knowledge. Historically, individuals sought answers in paper documents. The vertical filing system, which consolidated records in folders, replaced the arduous process of locating separate envelopes and became the popular method of organization at the turn of the century: Vertical filing, first presented to the business community at the 1893 Chicago Worlds Fair (where is it won a gold medal) became the accepted solution (Brooks). Subsequent developments like the Dewey Decimal System further optimized searches with subject-based parameters and moreover merged technology and literary

Marks 2 collections (Hjrland and Kyellsbech, 6). Nonetheless, these advances increased intellectual democracy only in the domain of library services: the commonplace that [] the experts had their information under control (Brooks) prevailed. Indeed, librarieswell-established as scholarly institutions before the electronic revolution of the 1950scontinued to play the dominant, intermediary role between source and searcher despite the implementation of online cataloguing. This concept, however, changed with the advent of the Internet. Originally intended to serve as a [] fail-safe communications network with multiple backups to survive a nuclear war (Clark, Regulating the Internet), the Internet gradually transmuted into a more socialized entity. By 1985, the National Science Foundation had created and connected four supercomputer centers with networks dubbed the NSFNET Backbone (Regulating the Internet). As popularity increased, domain specifications like .mil for military, .edu for academia, .gov for government, .com for commercial and .org for organizations (Regulating the Internet) were implemented. Furthermore, various universities contributed to the collective knowledgebase and invented rudimentary search engines to refine investigations (Regulating the Internet). The Internet intellectually empowered users and freed them from the librarys data-monopoly, imparting an [] unprecedented richness of information resources to their desktops (Clark, Hard Times for Libraries). It was far superior at remaining current and provided an everincreasing availability of information. Additionally, web-documents were more timely and economic to produce, distribute, categorize, and perpetuate than conventional journals (Hard Times for Libraries). The Internet was expedient, convenient, and relatively simple; libraries, even after attempting to incorporate the web, were bewildering and frustrating by comparison. Its rapid proliferation not only generated a rift between information services and libraries, but more importantly highlighted an overarching paradigm shift from factual reliance to freedom.

Marks 3 Ultimately, by decentralizing the library and championing personal exploration and independence, the Internet transformed the actions and attitudes of individuals toward information retrieval. In addition to increasing the capacity for individual inquiry, the Internet also altered views on fact-gathering by simplifying rhetorical invention. Rhetorical invention, as defined by Aristotle, is the process of locating and considering all available arguments on an issue (Crowley and Hawhee, 5). In essence, it is the procedure of discovering intrinsic proofs, or conclusions that are self-evident without factual substantiation (11, 12). The ancientsand also many contemporary rhetorswere concerned with intrinsic proofs because they [] embodied the art of rhetoric, lending themselves to a wide range of kairotic situations (11). Accordingly, prior to the Internet, students spent much time honing invention strategies, [] so that whenever they were called on to compose a speech or piece of written discourse, they could mentally review the invention process (13). The Internet allowed individuals to bypass the critically contemplative steps of invention, serving as an unrivaled rhetorical heuristic. Certainly, a few keystrokes linked the public to hundreds of new issues, premises, and propositions, an effect magnified by hypertext links (Brown, 2, 3). The Internet disseminated information in an integrative way that had [] special qualities and could be better than the front-to-back linear kind of reading that people engaged in (Anderson and Rainee). In an oxymoronic sense, by effectively eliminating introspective deliberation, the Internet engendered reliant brainstorming. Moreover, the Internets mutable nature mirrored the ever-changing arguments on issues, indirectly fostering in its users a deep appreciation for urgency and kairos. By accelerating rhetorical discovery, the Internet prompted a rapid exchange of ideas that forever revolutionized the public approach to information retrieval.

Marks 4 Just as the Internet facilitated rhetorical insight, so too did it modify impressions of information retrieval by raising concerns about privacy. The intrinsic value of privacy has long been recognized as a fundamental human right. The United States Constitution, for instance, makes several pointed references to the subject [] when it prohibits what it terms unreasonable search and seizure (Masci). Furthermore, prior to the arrival of the Internet, only affluent or socially eminent individuals could access and manipulate personal information (Masci). However, the Internets ability to extract personal data far outpaced legislature designed to protect it. Online companies used browsers and cookies to target advertisements toward consumers, and health care providers could potentially discriminate against clients with medical databases (Masci). Furthermore, the Internet could provide [] detailed financial histories including information about bank accounts, credit card balances, and loans (Masci). Even seemingly innocuous statistics were harvested on a truly massive scale, allowing companies to purposefully track and identify the habits of Internet frequenters. In fact, an entire industry of antivirus defense/software was created to arm users against spyware, malware and hacking. With FBI-wiretapping software like Carnivore, the Internet also served as an effective medium to apprehend criminals (Marshall). This erosion in privacy was further exacerbated by the evolution of social networking sites like Facebook and Twitter, which diminished control over public images through advances like photo-tagging (Clemmitt). Moreover, Internet posts were, for all intents and purposes, eternal. For all its facility and versatility, the Internet was thus a doubleedged sword, granting access to previously unobtainable information but breaching confidentiality in the process. This revelationthat surfing the web had potentially dire consequencesdissuaded many people from using the Internet and damaged its reputation as the definitive way to answer questions. In this way, the Internets unparalleled ability to infringe

Marks 5 upon individual privacies struck a unique equilibrium between the web and safer alternatives, forever changing how the public viewed knowledge-acquisition. By forwarding academic autonomy, catalyzing rhetorical invention, and decreasing confidentiality, the Internet irrevocably shifted how we view information retrieval. This shift is, somewhat ironically, already being chronicled on the web. Will the Internet ever truly replace the satisfying heft and tactility of a well-loved book? Will this fast-food of information retrieval have negative implications for critical thinking? Only time will tell.

Works Cited: Anderson, J.Q. & Rainie, L. (2010). The Future of the Internet IV. Washington, DC: Pew Internet & American Life Project. Brooks, Terrance. "Information Research." Information Research. 8.3 (2003): n. page. Print.

Marks 6 Brown, M. Neil. "The Importance of Critical Thinking for Student Use of the Internet" College Student Journal. (2000): 1-4. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. Clark, Charles S. "Hard Times for Libraries." CQ Researcher 26 June 1992: 553-72. Web. 25 Oct. 2012. Clark, Charles S. "Regulating the Internet." CQ Researcher 30 June 1995: 561-84. Web. 25 Oct. 2012. Clemmitt, Marcia. "Social Networking." CQ Researcher 17 Sept. 2010: 749-72. Web. 28 Oct. 2012. Crowley, Sharon, and Debra Hawhee. Ancient Rhetorics for Contemporary Students. 5th. Pearson, 2012. Print. Hjrland, B. & Kyllesbech Nielsen, L. (2001). Subject Access Points in Electronic Retrieval. Annual Review of Information Science and technology, 35, 249-298. Masci, David. "Internet Privacy." CQ Researcher 6 Nov. 1998: 953-76. Web. 25 Oct. 2012. Marshall, Patrick. "Privacy Under Attack." CQ Researcher 15 June 2001: 505-28. Web. 28 Oct. 2012.