I got into a discussion after my research class about formatting.  Formatting papers, formatting bibliographies, formatting academia in general.  An issue that frequently comes up is how to format something when its on the web.  Is there a proper technique? What is it? Is it assumed that we format everything the same as we do in paper? Does that not seem somewhat archaic?  I have many thoughts and opinions on the subject which I wouldn’t necessarily qualify as right all the time but in this case I don’t think there is a wrong either. Have you ever read an article on the web from an authoritative news site such as CNN?  Well I have and it pisses me off.  Not the fact that every article is about Obama but the fact that sourcing is somehow impossible to navigate.  Let me try to be clearer.  When you read an article and the talk about a website for example, why do these news sites never link to the discussed website itself?  It’s like they have a fear that they will lose readership by linking to the actual site they are discussing so they decide to not include the source.  Its insane! In good old fashion paper formats we leave a visual trail for the reader to refer back to. Be is in the bibliography or footnotes or author names or lose references in text, it doesn’t matter.  The fact remains that you have to physically go from one text to the next and this system has made doing so possible just simply by using the proven techniques.  If you think about it its quite an incredible process and simply works.  To draw links between two physically unrelated texts by simply following a proven language or code.   The web doesn’t work this way.  It’s completely different.  The idea that I have to take that information from a bibliography and then search for a place where the text is located and then have the track the text by author or publisher and then find the title of the work and then look for a physical location through a code system that has not been accessible till now (and which varies from library to library) is simply archaic.  It works when a physical text is required but simply isn’t possible on the web. I think bloggers have figured out how the system should work.  Lets call it web sourcing.  What bloggers do is when they are talking about another source or website they link to the actual website in that sentence.  For example, this is not a popular choice of methods by CNN. By discouraging readers from travelling to the source they not only piss people like me off but they also cut potential readership.  If your there your already there, your not coming back once you leave anyways.  In the blogging community individuals and sites use this technique to not only source their information but create communities of blogs and site who link back and forth enriching the content.  If anything it increases readership. On the web there are a completely different set of physics that apply.  Everything is tangible and within arms reach.  Although the old rules can still apply they may not be the best or most appropriate models to adopt in this environment.  We have the ability to touch the actual source, why not take it.  Imagine if you could push your finger into the footnote of a book and the page turned into the source of the footnote.  Does that not increase the value of the book you hold?