DRAFT Credible Web: Solution Landscape

Approaches

Potential approaches to increasing web credibility via data sharing

Inspection

Self-Report (1st Party)

• See The Trust Project
• Transparency, self-certification
• Data feed vs UI

Annotation (3rd Party)

• See Credibility Coalition
• Consider difficulty of faking ("gaming") signals
• Consider explicit/conscious vs implicit/incidental signals
• paid vs volunteer, friend vs stranger
• Use of Web Annotations

Corroboration (Claim-Based Systems, Fact-Checking)

• See IFCN, ClaimReview
• Detecting and sharing checkable claims in content
• Distributing demand for checking
• ClaimReview spec details
• Presentation conventions (CrossCheck, Annotation Layer)
• Matching/sharing repeated/similar appearances
• Tagging evidence
• Tagging claim relations (refutation, broader/narrower)
• Change over time, change in context

Reputation (Trust Networks)

• Allow user to pick their roots of trust, making a "personal walled garden"
• Help users navigate and assess trustworthiness of sources
• Trust = Accuracy (truth) + Benevolence + Competence
• Bootstrap from: followers? co-authoring?
• Danger in asymmetry, as negative info seen as more salient
• Danger in coerced statements (eg need for secret ballot)

Out Of Scope

1. Specifying quality metrics or certification standards for journalistic practice or other content providers
2. Assessment of credibility content or sources, beyond examples and test data used for development and education
3. Developing algorithms or constructing machine-learning training sets to enable machines to assess credibility of content or sources
4. Any technology which disempowers end-users or is likely to lead to increased censorship
5. New data formats, APIs, or cryptosystems. (Instead, we will support reuse of existing standards like JSON-LD.)
6. Assessing "hate speech" and other "conversational health" issues outside of credibility

Related Technologies

• JSON-LD
• Web Annotations
• SPARQL
• PROV Model