Group items tagged

Very Colorful , informative and clear Rating 95 - Excellent for its connectivity,comparability ,context, credibility and copyright

Content title no aut/.com/public site/ updated

Credibility/ no auth/title id/purpose to show public banding together online/sn posts

Critical thinkin/ saw tv recording..id publisher Citation/links direct to contributor's social network

Content. author and title id date current.

1) Content and Credibility a. Is the article accurate & thorough i. Incredibly so. It not only had links to the web article but also links and information on the entire company. b. Does it answer your questions about the topic i. Not directly but through links to the company's press releases. 2) Currency a. What is the date or timestamp of the article? Has it been revised? i. The time stamp on the article is March 12, 2014. It doesn't appear to be revised after that date. b. Is there information that could be updated? i. Not really. This one is pretty good because it covers not only basic information about the company but also links to the content I was looking for directly. 3) Authority and Credibility a. Is the author identified? i. No but it does have the page it is from. b. Can we see their job title or description? i. Not for the person who wrote the article but the financial institution that it came from. c. Can you see where the article originates? i. Yes from Reuters Knowledge Direct. 4) Continuity and Comparability a. Will the internet site be maintained and updated? i. This site is often updated. In this case mostly in a timely fashion. b. Can you rely on this source over time to provide up-to-date information? i. It still isn't real time but it is pretty close. This article was uploaded just a couple days ago. c. Does the internet site contain complete information as found in the comparable article? i. Yes. At least as it relates to the discussion of gay rights. This article has more information on the whole company. 5) Biases and Censorship a. Does that article seem biased in any way in its point of view? i. No. This article is factual instead of guiding towards a particular view. Because it focuses on the company as a whole and not the current debate it maintains its neutrality. b. Is there information included or not included that is found in the comparable article? i. Not within the scope of this article. Because this article just dic

1) Content and Credibility a. Is the article accurate & thorough i. Yes. This article covers all the same information that I found in previous searches. b. Does it answer your questions about the topic? i. Yes. This article covers all the pertinent information. The problem is that they make light of the situation and put jokes in the article. 2) Currency a. What is the date or timestamp of the article? Has it been revised? i. March 12, 2014 was when this article was published. It does not look like it has been revised since then. b. Is there information that could be updated? i. It doesn't include the fact that he plead guilty and was fined $79 for it. 3) Authority and Credibility a. Is the author identified? i. Yes. Tony Hicks b. Can we see their job title or description? i. No, but it is assumed that he is a reporter for the Constra Costa Times. c. Can you see where the article originates? i. Yes. It the San Jose Mercury News (California) 4) Continuity and Comparability a. Will the internet site be maintained and updated? i. Yes this site is maintained and updated regularly. Just not in real time. b. Can you rely on this source over time to provide up-to-date information? i. Yes. It is only a couple days old so other than a couple details it is still accurate. c. Does the internet site contain complete information as found in the comparable article? i. It does mostly. The comparable article I found was a little newer and covered his trail, plea, and fine. 5) Biases and Censorship a. Does that article seem biased in any way in its point of view? i. Yes. The author tries to make jokes throughout the article ruining his credibility as a source. In a serious article jokes and whit are negatives. b. Is there information included or not included that is found in the comparable article? i. There is a few pieces of information that could have been covered that was found in the comparable article. Such as his plea and the fine. However this has the name of

1, 2)Article contains content of a serious nature that directly relates to my research by a published author many time over for a website made for business management and up. 3)My previous knowledge from working in the tech field and using this to work from home allows me to see the validity of the information therein from personal experience. 4, 5)The author is posted next to the article for copyright, and the article contains original information from the author, so no citation needed. 6, 7)The site is continually updated (evidence from home page) and I do not believe that my search results that lead me here or this site is censored. 8)I verified this site is viewable on IE, Firefox and Chrome. 9)Comparability not important for project and not available. 10)Context is open ended for this project.

Evidence for how internet has closed gaps in collaboration efforts of distance, and also time.

1,2)PDF from EBSCOhost containing content of a serious nature, authored by two PhD's. 3)My previous knowledge from working in the tech field and using this to work from home allows me to see the validity of the information therein from personal experience. 4,5)Authors are printed at the start of the article and contains information under the creative commons attribution license, so no copyright/citation necessary. 6)EBSCOhost is continually updated with new articles 7)Being a school-provided resource, the results may be censored, but I do not believe it had an affect on my results. 8)PDF verified viewable on IE, Chrome, Firefox. 9)Comparability not important for project and not available. 10)Context is open ended for this project.

1,2)PDF from EBSCOhost containing content of a serious nature, authored by a writer for well known technology publication. 3)My previous knowledge from working in the tech field and using this to work from home allows me to see the validity of the information therein from personal experience. 4)Author is printer under the article title for copyright. 5)Citation used throughout article when outside information used. 6)EBSCOhost is continually updated with new articles 7)Being a school-provided resource, the results may be censored, but I do not believe it had an affect on my results. 8)I verified this site is viewable on IE, Firefox and Chrome. 9)Comparability not important for project and not available. 10)Context is open ended for this project.