Assessing Sources for Credibility

The resources that I tend to stick with are those that are research and evidence based. Among the first items I have chosen for this week’s project were resources that were either links to journals or links directly from a government source such as a report. When you choose sources that can be verified, it adds credibility to your work and validates it in a way that providing an opinion cannot. Some new sources can be used as a credible source granted that there is evidence backing the claim. Part of the problem with using news networks is that they do not always verify their information and they sometimes disseminate incorrect information.

We have had this problem in our group, but one of the resources that had to be removed was a reference to a press release. Press releases and blogs are not credible sources of information. Neither is Wikipedia or other rather unknown websites. They are typically not peer review and are not based on evidence. In the case such as a website like Wikipedia, it is edited by both professionals and laymen alike. Likewise, there is no data behind them. I also try to stay away from sources of information that may be biased. For instance, using a reference to FOX News probably would not be a good idea since most of their leanings are right wing and liberal. The information they present is biased and typically is in accordance with their agenda.

Whenever writing, we should have as neutral of a view as possible. Giving in to biases will not strengthen the argument that we are trying to make. It will actually have the opposite effect. This was apparent in one of the sources we referenced, which went on about one senator’s view about the current state of veteran health care. The view was that of criticism of the President of the United States and the senator was using this to push his agenda. However, according to research, assisting mentally ill veterans has been a long standing issue that dates back to the 1960s.