We are increasingly awash with information. Access to vast quantities is easier than ever, especially via the web, as is the ability of anyone and everyone to publish information to large audiences on social media. The information readily and instantly available to us is representative of a myriad of different views and perspectives and displays hugely varying levels of quality. Citizen journalism, for example, offers immediacy of access to news of events which is made available with unfettered scope in terms of the angles, interpretations or spin put on it by its authors. Social media continuously spouts forth well considered critical and creative thoughts alongside inconsequential chitchat.

However, there is a great difference between living in an information-rich world and a knowledge-rich world. We acquire knowledge by selecting and processing information. But a greater volume of information does not necessarily translate into a greater volume or depth of useful knowledge. Knowledge generated from poor-quality information is in most cases less valuable and effective than knowledge generated from high-quality information, the finding and effective processing of which is a central component of information behaviour. Just as the uncritical consumption of high volumes of junk food can lead to physical illness, so the uncritical consumption of high volumes of low-quality information can result in intellectual ill health. By intellectual ill health I mean an inability to function in an effective evidence-based way in making important decisions and solving problems in our lives. By low-quality information I mean information that is inaccurate, unreliable, biased or not relevant to the purpose for which it is being sought and used.

In relation to all aspects of our life, the ability to know what is needed, to find potentially relevant information, and to evaluate, select and use it is important. Information literacy – the ability to adopt appropriate and effective information behaviour – is crucial if information is to be critically evaluated and integrated (or chosen not to be) as useful knowledge. The need critically to evaluate information has always been present in relation to more traditional published sources from reputable and well established publishing sources. But our current access to such a volume and range of sources, displaying such variety and variability in quality and credibility, brings with it the constant possibility of our finding or encountering seriously inaccurate and biased information. This potential problem is likely only to increase.