Evaluating sources assignment Introduction: This assignment is designed to introduce you to evaluating internet sources, using the “lateral reading” technique described in the videos. Lateral reading involves leaving the website or information source you are evaluating to find other objective information about your source. In other words, you go away from what a source says about itself and find what others say about it. The goal of evaluation is to answer one, or if need be, all of the following questions: Who (author/publisher/sponsor) is behind this information (article, website, blog, tweet, post, etc.)? What is the evidence? Why is the source written the way it is? Do other sources write about it in the same way? Asking these questions, referred to in the videos as “evaluating sources” or "fact checking" has become increasingly important, especially in contexts which require accurate, unbiased and reliable information, like class assignments, voting or health information, and purchasing decisions. We don't have to evaluate every meme or pet video, but we should pay attention in those situations where information matters. Difficulty in finding solid, reliable sources during the Covid-19 pandemic probably proves the point best. We have been overwhelmed with an exhausting flood of information from social media, internet sites, news sites and anything else popping up in our Goggle searches. The opportunities for misinformation (false information without intention of causing harm) and disinformation (false information deliberately created to harm a person, social group, organization or country) have flourished. Directions: This assignment is designed to lead you through some methods you can use for evaluating internet sources. In order to receive full credit, you must identify the specific information you found. For example, answers such as "The publisher of this source is well-known" or "This source is trustworthy" will not receive credit. Instead, you must identify the publisher and give specific information regarding why it is, or is not, trustworthy. Your fact-checking doesn't have to be extremely detailed, but you do have to have an explanation based on your own searching. You may recognize untrustworthy information from your own analysis. For example, many of us have learned to be wary of social media posts and don't trust them for that reason alone. We may have already identified unreliable sources from our experience in using them. However, to receive credit, you must take extra steps to verify information. The first three questions are related to this article: Official Statement from China for Recommended Treatment of COVID-19 Using Vitamin C. 1. The article reports on an announcement from a Shanghai hospital in regard to the use of high doses of vitamin C to treat COVID-19. Look at the page the article is on as well as the article homepage, https://www.worldhealth.net/ Can you identify any motive or incentive this site might have for publishing this article? Click or tap here to enter text. 2. This article cites several references in support of this story. Before diving into the evidence, however, look at the reliability of the source itself. Locate the “About” section at the top of the page. How does this organization describe itself? Click or tap here to enter text. 3. Now do an internet search for worldhealth.net. You could also search the source in Wikipedia. From your research, do you consider this site to be a reliable source? Name one fact that supports your answer. Click or tap here to enter text. The next three questions are related to the following Tweets: 4. Since it is often difficult to find information about an individual Twitter user, try examining the claim itself. Do an internet search for “patent coronavirus” and briefly browse the list of results. Based on the search results, is this claim reliable? Click or tap here to enter text. 5. Choose one of the search results from a fact-checking site, like PolitiFact or Poynter.org, or from a news source that you believe is trustworthy. Which source did you choose? Click or tap here to enter text. How do you know the source is trustworthy? Click or tap here to enter text. (Hint: To easily find news sources for search results, click on the “News” link next to the “All” link under the search box.) 6. Briefly describe the evidence that supports or refutes the claim that the Gates Foundation owns a coronavirus patent as described in this Tweet. Click or tap here to enter text. The next three questions are related to the following news story: RaTG13 – the Undeniable Evidence That the Wuhan Coronavirus Is Man-Made Read this article and briefly browse the G-news site, https://gnews.org/ 7. From this story and other articles on the site, is there any evidence that this news source has a particular viewpoint? If so, briefly describe what it is. Click or tap here to enter text. 8. Do some lateral reading about G-news or its founder, Miles Guo. What evidence did you find that either supported or refuted your initial impression of the site? Click or tap here to enter text. 9. Can you find any support for the claim that the coronavirus is man-made? Click or tap here to enter text. 5 DB2: The issues..... The second writing project is going to ask you to synthesize what several sources say about one of the issues related to the novel Coronavirus (look back at week one assignments for topics/ideas). For this discussion board, think about what topic you may want to explore, and locate one online source that discusses that topic. In an initial post by Wednesday: Read and attach/link your article to the discussion board. Explain who the author/source is and what that may tell us about the argument, give a brief overview of the argument(s), and then respond to the argument. What do you think of the argument? By Sunday, respond to at least two of your classmates' posts by locating an additional source for each that address the classmate's issue. With your attach/linked additional source, explain how it can add to, complicate, or respond to the original source. Evaluation: I will not grade your participation based on quantity, but rather on overall quality and regularity (ie., that you offer regular and valuable contributions to the class discussion). Your comments should offer new insights, work to advance the overall discussion, and provide constructive feedback, critique, and praise your peers. • In order to receive full points for this discussion, you should follow these guidelines. o Are your comments expansive and relevant? Do you further the discussion in a meaningful way? o Did you respond to multiple peers and engage in multiple conversations? o Were you a regular and valuable participant over the life of the discussion without monopolizing the conversation? You will not receive full points for logging in once to post and make a couple replies. You should consistently follow and add to the conversation over the course of the week. For instance, try to make your post at least 24-48 hours before the discussion ends and then fill that time period with multiple reposes in multiple conversations. Do not log in once to post and respond to others. o Were you respectful and constructive in your feedback to your peers? This assignment aligns to outcome 2.4 How to Respond: Click in the Reply box below. Prepare your reply and when finished click Post Reply.
Purchase answer to see full attachment