E VA LU AT I O N O F W E BS I T E S

WEBSITE CRITERIA

WEBSITE URL: SOURCE OF WEBSITE

• Government site?• www.whitehouse.gov www.state.gov

• Organizational?• www.peta.org   www.occupywallst.org

• A dotcom site?• www.disney.com www.microsoft.com

.EDU = ACADEMIC, COLLEGES/UNIVERSITIES

www.ucla.edu

www.csulb.edu

.GOV = GOVERNMENTwww.whitehouse.gov

www.cdc.gov

http://www.usda.gov/

.ORG = ORGANIZATIONScharitable, religious or lobbying group

www.peta.org

www.nra.org

.COM = BUSINESS

www.disney.com

www.microsoft.com

OTHER URLS

http://www.army.mil/

.mil = military site

.net = network

http://www.whois.net/

WEBSITE CRITERIA

• Authority• Sponsor/organization: who sponsors the site? Govt,

organization, business, educational, or other?

• Contact Information• Is there an ‘About Us’ tab? Very important!

• Audience• Specific group or audience [edu site directed to students] • Specific age group? Other focus on specific audience

• Currency• Updated regularly [see date at bottom of first page of

site]

OTHER CRITERIA

• Authorship of material on site• Who writes material, entries or articles for the site? • Who is featured on the site [experts in the field, governmental

representatives, or other?]• Objectivity --- Factual/Biased• Advocacy : emotional appeals, biased language• Factual: statistics, facts, government information

• Coverage• Presents updated perspective on topic• How far back is information kept on the site? [backlog of articles or

entries]

• Appropriateness/Revelance• Is the website relevant to your topic? Why, or why not? [don’t choose

‘just a website’ about your topic. Find a specific article or entry pertaining to your topic]

ORGANIZATIONS = OBJECTIVITY?

Animal Rights www.peta.org

• Organizations present specific perspectives on issues they represent

• Language Use [emotional versus factual]

EMOTIONAL APPEAL• Organizational site:• Weighted language• Biased perspective

Example of emotional appeal and weighted language from www.peta.org

ADVOCACY WITHOUT STRONG EMOTIONAL APPEAL

Sometimes advocacy sites do not feature weighted language.You must still evaluate the information on advocacy websites carefully

www.englishfirst.org

BIASED PERSPECTIVE [EVEN IF YOU AGREE WITH CAUSE]

www.occupywallstr.org

GOVERNMENT SITE VS. UNVERIFIED SITE

www.cdc.govUnverified news site???

AUTHORITY [UNIQUE TO WEB – CELEBRITIES AND CAUSES]

Celebrity endorsementwww.peta.org www.water.org

AUTHORITY IS OFTEN MORE DEFINED IN PUBLISHED SOURCES

Writer• Editor• Board Audience

Writer Audience

Published Sources

Web Resources:

• Website author

• Website Publisher

• No one!

VALUE OF ORGANIZATIONAL WEBSITES

• Sometimes questions existing information [even factual] • Presents alternative perspectives on topics• Examines conflicting/opposing viewpoints on topics

EXAMPLES

• Cigarette smoking: although an issue before websites, 30 years ago official government sources supported smoking as a non harmful, or neutral activity [supported by cigarette manufacturers]

• Food safety/GMOs: although government websites maintain the safety of GMOs, independent websites may question this stance

CorporationsGovernment

Public

Where advocacy meets conflicting motives

ACADEMIC/NONACADEMIC?

Sources for scholarly information include govt and educational websites:

ACCURACY

Is this information found and verified in other sources?

USDA

PETA

APPROPRIATENESS, RELEVANCY

• How relevant is the information to your topic?

• How would you use www.occupywallst.org in a research paper?

• How does this compare to other sources of verified information: books, reference sources,

reports

CURRENCY

Look at bottom for date. This usually indicates last updated version of site.

LIST OF WEBSITES FOR EXERCISE

• Government• www.whitehouse.gov• www.state.gov• www.cdc.gov• http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/dcdc/pages/default.aspx

• Organizational• www.occupywallst.org • www.peta.org• http://www.understandinganimalresearch.org.uk/• http://water.org/• www.englishfirst.org• www.nra.org