The first site I visited was ( http://www.hastac.org/node/1960 ) on this site it discussed the potential problems of privacy, relating to our future essay. I read the article and noticed it was a blog. For an authoritative source i was skeptical, but i dove deeper into the sites credibility, and found that it is valid. I looked into the "about" and "history" and found that it is ,"a consortium of humanists, artists, scientists, and engineers, of leading researchers and nonprofit research institutions..." Further in the history column it talked about their purpose and I inferred it was not a hoax website.
The other website I encountered was ( http://amandafrench.net/2009/02/16/facebook-terms-of-service-compared/ ) This website was again another blog from a person. In it she provided the facts about facebook and its privacy issue problems. What was helpful was the fact that she compared it to other sites, such that of, myspace, yahoo, flickr and others. A negative tone towards facebook due to the privacy problems was prevalent in the blog but nonetheless it seemed like a legit source for information. She had the facts straight, although slanted to one side but still correct. The blogs purpose was obviously to persuade and inform the public.
The last website I checked was ( http://www.uic.edu/htbin/cgiwrap/bin/ojs/index.php/fm/article/view/2378/2089 ) The validity of this site was credible. It was online journal site that a person wrote on the cencorship of China. It appeared to be a research paper with the ability to be reviewed and edited. There was not a slant, the essay seemed for the most part informative, stating the practices of the internet and privacy. This site again is credible and able to be used as an authoritative source.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nick, all you do here really is narrate your reading experience rather than assess the source. How is detailing your search for an authoritative voice an assessment? Try to hone that skill of being a critic. You do this more effectively in the final source, but the other two need some work.
ReplyDeleteproviding whether it is a good authoritative source or not is helpful but it doesn't really go into detail of why the source can be credible. try to make more sense of why the sources are credible, are there any hidden meanings to these new technological advances? does it help us in the future? how does it relate to us?
ReplyDelete