How do you judge the value of expertise on the Web? 

Does it differ from your notion of expertise in face-to-face settings?

In both environments, we have the opportunity to obtain an individual’s background and areas of expertise.  On the Web, many experts who were before all but unapproachable, or unavailable, in the past has made it easier to obtain credible information that would have taken ages to ascertain.  For example, a Harvard professor that does work that I find inspirational and informative would not have been available to me unless I sat in on his lecture.  Now, I can view it on line.  Information that may be delivered by a credible source in a face to face environment may be correct, but may also be antiquated.  I find it is easier to access more timely information on the Web.  Sites like Academia and Research Gate, amongst others, provide research and opinions from experts all over the world.  I don't think that seeing these individuals 'live and in the flesh' makes their knowledge and perspective any more or less credible.  The onus is on the reader to  determine the value of the expertise.

What do you think?