Searching for information on Google is like trying to find a needle in a haystack. Is that true? Was the library of the 19th century more efficient? Explain. We have access to more references in less time by searching for information on Google versus using an index card system in the 19th century library. A historical example is the traditional card catalog in a library, which essentially did not contain any raw data itself, but instead had a series of cards organized alphabetically so that each card pointed the user to a book that might contain the information for which he or she was searching. Much more common today are the metadata in Web sites that encode data so that the user can identify and retrieve desired information. (Bowles 2010). In this statement, libraries depended on an alphabetical card system to direct researchers to resources and references to possibly attain the information they were looking for. Once they found the books or encyclopedias they were looking for, they would still have to manually skim through to see if the information was sufficient to their search. With Google were able to type in exactly what we’re looking for and have immediate results. Google is like a virtual everything encyclopedia that has answers for everything. The more specific you enter your search the more specific your result will be. The only downside is having to decipher which searches are reliable and accurate on Google because of all the websites that allow people to add input and personal opinions versus just factual information. o
How is searching in a specific database, such as Ashford’s library, different from searching in Bing, Google, or Yahoo? There are two main types of online information databases that you will encounter. The first is a public domain database, which is entirely free and open to anyone with a computer and an Internet connection. The second is a proprietary database, which is accessible only to someone who pays for a subscription or...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document