Ask yourself:

     (1)  For controversial topics, is the information biased (one-sided) or balanced with both
            pro and con viewpoints?

Example: The Shakespeare Mystery -- Did someone else write the works attributed to William Shakespeare? This site presents various opinions on this controversial topic.

      (2)  Does the author or publisher have a "vested interest" in the topic?

Example: Bettersleep.Org -- from the Better Sleep Council, "a nonprofit organization supported by the mattress industry that is devoted to educating the public about the importance of sleep to good health and quality of life..."

     (3)  Are arguments supported with documentation or are they unsubstantiated?

Example: The Cigarette Papers -- sources of information are supplemented with documentation.

Suggested Activity Example: The Farsight Institute -- Are arguments supported with documentation or are they unsubstantiated?  Email your findings to your Instructor at mfpriebe@kings.edu.  Title the Subject of the email "The Farsight Institute."

 

Look for: the stated purpose of the Web site to determine the possibility of bias.  If none is present, you may need to further investigate the author or publisher. strongly worded assertions that should be supported by evidence and documentation. references to alternative points of view.

Ask yourself:

How in-depth and complete is the information or material?
Is the information relevant to your topic? 
Who is the intended audience?
What time period is covered?

 

Look for: links to accurate, additional information on the subject. proper citation information and/or a legitimate bibliography. other sites on the same topic that you can quickly browse and compare to yours. (You can quickly locate them by browsing a search engine such as Google or AltaVista.) Consider: Web coverage often differs from print coverage. Frequently it is difficult to determine the extent of coverage. Consult a Reference Librarian if the information you have found needs to be verified elsewhere.

Ask yourself:

When was the material written or published?  The dates should be readily apparent.
Is the information available still relevant?
What is the date of the most recent revision, or is there evidence of newly added information or links?
Is the site well maintained (eg. are links functional or broken)?

 

Look for: revision or publication dates to measure currency of information. "dead" links; they could be an indication that the site isn't being monitored regularly or updated. the recency of facts and figures.  Are they too old to be relevant? Caution: Undated factual or statistical information is no better than data written anonymously.  Therefore, information of this sort may be unreliable. Don't assume that the material offered by the web site is the best information available. Investigate other sites that concern your topic.