Is it a Hoax or not?

Earlier this week, Dennis O'Connor and I offered a 'model lesson' at the ISTE Conference in San Diego. It was a full session, indicating interest in seeing how information fluency may be embedded in a session.

We probably attempted too much for a 60 minute session; we never did get to the fourth mini-lesson. In case you want to see our Lesson Plans for all four segments, you will find them here. Feel free to use them in your teaching.

The target for the lessons is Genochoice.com, a site that allows parents to create designer babies online. Fact checking claims and information on the site quickly turns up Red Flags. Most external references state that the site is a hoax, the claims are bogus.

I agree with bogus, but don't think it's really a hoax. The majority of information is made up. You can't "read" DNA using a thumb scan that is nothing more than a Flash movie embedded in a page. You can't determine if my medical insurance will cover the cost of genetic "improvements" based solely on my name. There's no evidence that you can "fix" genetic disorders. Someday that may be possible, but not yet.

What is a hoax? Most definitions boil down to "a deliberate deception." Some of the more malicious ones also attempt to defraud, which is not the case with Genochoice.  But while the information is deliberate, does it also aim to deceive?  I think it has a different purpose.

The profile of the author is the crux of the matter. It doesn't take long to determine that Virgil Wong is responsible for the content; he also owns the domain name. But is he a deceiver?

The inconsistency comes when you stop to consider why an artist-medical keynote speaker-PhD candidate-hospital webmaster would create a popular hoax site. Wouldn't that harm his reputation?


Bogus and Hoax sites present layers of challenges. Figuring out if they are bogus or a hoax is one layer. Deeper is: why does this site exist?

If it's not a hoax, what is it?

Dennis O'Connor and I are running a "Model Lesson" workshop tomorrow at the Midwest Educational Technology Conference in St. Charles, MO.

As part of the session, we're offering up four different challenges that demonstrate search and evaluation techniques. For this, we're using a spin-off of the RYT Hospital site: genochoice.com.

While students may not be able easily to detect the fictive nature of the site, the site is loaded with Red Flags.

What is not easily understood by seasoned investigators--and I expect most of the participants in tomorrow's session--is whether the site is a hoax or not. There is sufficient evidence to suggest it is not a hoax, contrary to numerous .edu sites that include genochoice on their hoax lists. The hoax theory starts to unravel the more you tug at it.

But if it isn't a hoax, what is it?

That's the challenge.

And it's a pretty good (i.e., deep) one. I'd like to hear readers' opinions on it. Why does this site exist?

By the way, the Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus is another site that is likely in this shadowy category. Sure, it's bogus. But what is the purpose of the site?  Why would someone go to the trouble of keeping it fresh and perpetuating the fiction of a tree octopus? If you've never asked your students to figure that out, they've missed a real investigative challenge.