Information and Documentation: A look at restaurant menus

April 2, 2007

What is information and what is documentation? I started thinking about this last week when I was dining at California Pizza Kitchen with a friend. I lost about 30 lbs. during the summer, and I try my best to lose even more by eating healthy. You know how some restaurants have symbols denoting certain health information about their menu items. Some places place a chili by an item description, signifying that it is spicy; sometimes they place a heart by a dish that is supposedly low cholesterol/low saturated fat.

Obviously, each menu item has a plethora of nutrition information. Information exists everywhere, whether we are aware of it or not, but it is documentation that allows us to know what that information is and make meaning from it. I like Suzanne Briet’s idea that a document is information from the natural world that has been captured and made an object of study. Some restaraunts choose to capture some of the nutrition information and document it using symbols like a heart or chili. But why don’t restaurants document all of the nutrition information including calories, fat content, and cholesterol? Does the absence of a heart next to a menu item mean that it is a “heart attack on a plate?” Why does a heart signify heart-healthy? Why can’t a heart next to a menu description mean that it is a heart-attack on a plate? I bet we can find many menu items at restaurants that are unhealthy. A fellow colleague from the department told me that she doesn’t mind advertisements because they are merely free information. True, but not all of the information is documented. Only the information favorable to them is documented. It’s always important to remember who is doing the documenting. I doubt that a restaurant like Chilis or CPK would ever want to document all the nutrition information on each menu item (probably because most of it is unhealthy and nobody would eat there if they knew that what they just ordered has the calories equivalent to three days of eating).


Plagiarism in Blogs

February 24, 2007

I’ve been thinking alot about plagiarism on the Internet. I have always thought of plagiarism in the specific context of people taking information off the Internet and replicating it into the paper they turn in for class w/o crediting the source.

Recently, though, I have been thinking of plagiarism that takes place when a blogger takes the content of someone else’s blog and posts it into their own blog without crediting the source. How could plagiarism even be verified in this case? Who is to say that the plagiariser didn’t come up with the content first, and the other person copied it? Who is the original creator? Who owes what to whom?