web criteria
TRANSCRIPT
WEBSITE URL: SOURCE OF WEBSITE
• Government site?
• www.whitehouse.gov www.state.gov
• Organizational?
• www.peta.org www.occupywallst.org
• A dotcom site?
• www.disney.com www.microsoft.com
.ORG = ORGANIZATIONS
charitable, religious or lobbying group
WEBSITE CRITERIA
• Authority
• Sponsor/organization: who sponsors the site? Govt,
organization, business, educational, or other?
• Contact Information
• Is there an ‘About Us’ tab? Very important!
• Audience
• Specific group or audience [edu site directed to students]
• Specific age group? Other focus on specific audience
• Currency
• Updated regularly [see date at bottom of first page of site]
OTHER CRITERIA
• Authorship of material on site• Who writes material, entries or articles for the site?
• Who is featured on the site [experts in the field, governmental representatives, or other?]
• Objectivity --- Factual/Biased• Advocacy : emotional appeals, biased language
• Factual: statistics, facts, government information
• Coverage• Presents updated perspective on topic
• How far back is information kept on the site? [backlog of articles or entries]
• Appropriateness/Revelance• Is the website relevant to your topic? Why, or why not? [don’t
choose ‘just a website’ about your topic. Find a specific article or entry pertaining to your topic]
ORGANIZATIONS = OBJECTIVITY?
Animal Rights
• Organizations
present specific
perspectives on
issues they
represent
• Language Use
[emotional
versus factual]
MAY BE ADVOCACY BUT NOT .ORG
Alternative news source
.com suffix
still presents advocacy
perspective
AUTHORITY IS OFTEN MORE DEFINED IN PUBLISHED SOURCES
Writer
• Editor
• Board Audience
Writer Audience
Published Sources
Web Resources:
• Website
author
• Website
Publisher
• No one!
VALUE OF ORGANIZATIONAL WEBSITES
• Sometimes questions existing
information [even factual]
• Presents alternative perspectives on
topics
• Examines conflicting/opposing
viewpoints on topics
EXAMPLES
• Cigarette smoking: although an issue before
websites, 30 years ago official government sources
supported smoking as a non harmful, or neutral
activity [supported by cigarette manufacturers]
• Food safety/GMOs: although government
websites maintain the safety of GMOs, independent
websites may question this stance
CorporationsGovernment
Public
Where advocacy meets
conflicting motives
APPROPRIATENESS, RELEVANCY
• How relevant is the information to your topic?
• How does the information compare to other
sources of verified information: books, reference
sources, reports
WHICH SITE WOULD YOU USE?
Try distinguishing between these two sites for the topic:
Animal Cruelty.
A. Humane Society of America
http://www.humanesociety.org/?credit=web_id235304807
B. PETA: People for Ethical Treatment of Animals• http://www.peta.org/
What are some differences between the sites/organizations?
How do you think each organization approaches the cause of animal cruelty?
WHICH SITE WOULD YOU USE?
You are writing a research paper exploring the pros and cons of using “marriage promotion” as a means to decrease poverty and improve families’ well-being. Which source below would be a more reliable source of statistics? Be prepared to explain your reasoning.
A. The Heritage Foundationwww.heritage.org/Research/Family/cda0306.cfm
B. The Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study
www.fragilefamilies.princeton.edu/
C. Both choices are equally good.
D. Neither choice appears reliable.
WHICH SITE WOULD YOU USE?
You are writing an essay about the health aspects of choosing a vegetarian diet. Which of the following sources would be a better place to get objective scientific information?
A. Meat vs. Vegetarian Diethttp://technorati.com/lifestyle/article/meat-vs-
vegetarian-diet-your-best/
B. Vegetarianism in a Nutshell: Health
www.peta.org/living/vegetarian-living/vegetarianism-in-a-nutshell-health.aspx
C. Both choices are equally good.
D. Neither choice appears reliable.