The second URL has some good information and is a good source as its written by a social media marketing manager. If anyone knows social media and connecting it to people in the modern world it would be him.
Your 'daily beast'link is a .com, which makes the websites less credible. It is however written by a recognized author, who writes for newsweek. This is obviously something you agree with, as it is regarding social media's influence on how we are becoming more lonely than ever. I would also suggest getting the information directly from newsweek, rather than daily beast.
As a counter-argument for you to consider.. The only way I can stay in touch with my friends and family back home in Australia is through facebook (because skype just goes crazy sometimes).
This article does have some good information included, and the author is obviously invested in the topic.
Author: Johannah Cornblatt Publisher: The Daily Beast Purpose: To inform readers on why social media is making us more lonely. Bias: Couldn't see a bias, as she doesn't really use much personal experience is regards to her use of social media. Information included: A small article. Domain name: http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/08/20/lonely-planet.html
JUSTINE! This was a great source in my opinion. Adam Helweh has a lot of creditable back up when you Google his name. He is clearly a man that enjoys mimicking social media and how serious it is taken my other people. He has a Google+, twitter, Facebook, and instagram! So he is one that keeps up with these social networks to see how people of power use them and how it affects their current position. For instance he cites a ruling from a court room about a man that was fired from a campaign election because he liked the opponents Facebook status. To me that is just silly, I mean to take a man's sole income because of a social networking high face is absurd. I think his article really gives a clear view of how people perceive social networks, and it also shows how petty these people really are. I mean I think that social networking should be taken somewhat seriously however there is no reason a person should be fired from their job for liking something. Now if they went of ranting on their own page about how much their company sucked and that their boss is involved in money laundering then there would be an issue worth addressing. It’s kind of like if your boyfriend likes a girls picture, but never publically posts that he is in a relationship with her then there is no reason to even bring it up! Good source though, it also helps that it was published this year in the United States, it adds to your creditability.
After careful evaluation of the socialmediaexplorer.com source, I have concluded that this particular source does qualify (barely) as a valid source. The publisher (socialmediaexplorer.com) is not terribly credible, however, they do hold some water in the realm of social media because of who they let publish on their website. The author of this particular source is certainly credible, as he is the CEO of a social media marketing agency. I have no reason to believe that the content of the source is inaccurate due to the credibility of the author. The audience and purpose of this source, as well, are certainly acceptable and do pertain to the assignment. Lastly, the currency of the article is fresh and up to date. Although, I do believe the source is credible, it does have some flaws. Publisher, as mentioned before, isn't the strongest. There is some bias, also, apparent throughout the article as the author chimes in his own opinion on several occasions. The pro's of the source's credibility outweigh the con's, therefore, the source is credible.
The social media explorer website is a website attempting to make money through providing advertising on it. This along with being a .com web address are two reasons that hinder the credibility of the website. Furthermore, the publisher is Social Media Explorer which decreases reliabilty.
The author, Adam Helweh is stated and there is a biography about him on the website which is beneficial, as it allows the audience to know who he is, what he does and any bias in the writing. The information provided and the way it is provided are both based on personal opinion which affects its reliability but also enhances the purpose of the website, the audience's enjoyment while reading and the success as a website.
The URL I read was http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/08/20/lonely-planet.html
Author: Johanna Cornblatt.
Publisher: Newsweek. Linked to Daily Beast website.
Purpose: The purpose for this article to is to discuss the increasing feelings of isolation and loneliness despite our growing population in the U.S. It compares real human interaction to social media interaction.
Bias: The bias in the article hints to the fact that we would be better off, in general, if we interacted with real people on a regular basis instead of living in a false and likely very unsatisfying artificial community.
Information included: Quotes from John T. Cacioppo, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago and coauthor of Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection; Duke University researcher; Harry Reis, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester; and Michael J. Bugeja, a professor of communications at Iowa State University and author of Interpersonal Divide: The Search for Community in a Technological Age.
I would have to say that both of your sources are credible. For one, they both went into depth on the subject, providing both research and statistics. Second: for the first source posted, information about the author is given at the bottom. It honestly helps to have that information within that source rather than Google their name and have a million results come up (which can also bring up people with the same name). I think the only source that I think is about 90% credible is the daily beast. the only reason I say this is because i don't know where they got some their information from. Was it done by someone else and they just used that info? did they do their own research/study?
The article "When Does Social Media Interaction Become Human Expression?" is a valid source concerning free speech in social media. That being said, the article and the website/publishers have an obvious bias. The author runs a social media marketing agency which guarantees that he will have a bias for social media. The publishers of the web site are also involved in social media marketing. Both the author and the publishers have financial reasons to want social media to be protected. That being said, the article, although biased, is still highly relevant. The information appears to be accurate, and the subject matter highlights an important issue facing social media users.
The URL I read was http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/08/20/lonely-planet.html
Author: Johanna Cornblatt.
Publisher: Newsweek. Linked to Daily Beast website.
Purpose: The purpose for this article to is to discuss the increasing feelings of isolation and loneliness despite our growing population in the U.S. It compares real human interaction to social media interaction.
Bias: The bias in the article hints to the fact that we would be better off, in general, if we interacted with real people on a regular basis instead of living in a false and likely very unsatisfying artificial community.
Information included: Quotes from John T. Cacioppo, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago and coauthor of Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection; Duke University researcher; Harry Reis, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester; and Michael J. Bugeja, a professor of communications at Iowa State University and author of Interpersonal Divide: The Search for Community in a Technological Age.
The second URL has some good information and is a good source as its written by a social media marketing manager. If anyone knows social media and connecting it to people in the modern world it would be him.
ReplyDeleteHi Justine,
ReplyDeleteYour 'daily beast'link is a .com, which makes the websites less credible. It is however written by a recognized author, who writes for newsweek. This is obviously something you agree with, as it is regarding social media's influence on how we are becoming more lonely than ever. I would also suggest getting the information directly from newsweek, rather than daily beast.
As a counter-argument for you to consider..
The only way I can stay in touch with my friends and family back home in Australia is through facebook (because skype just goes crazy sometimes).
This article does have some good information included, and the author is obviously invested in the topic.
Author: Johannah Cornblatt
Publisher: The Daily Beast
Purpose: To inform readers on why social media is making us more lonely.
Bias: Couldn't see a bias, as she doesn't really use much personal experience is regards to her use of social media.
Information included: A small article.
Domain name: http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/08/20/lonely-planet.html
http://www.socialmediaexplorer.com/social-media-marketing/social-media-interaction-as-human-expression/
ReplyDeleteJUSTINE! This was a great source in my opinion. Adam Helweh has a lot of creditable back up when you Google his name. He is clearly a man that enjoys mimicking social media and how serious it is taken my other people. He has a Google+, twitter, Facebook, and instagram! So he is one that keeps up with these social networks to see how people of power use them and how it affects their current position. For instance he cites a ruling from a court room about a man that was fired from a campaign election because he liked the opponents Facebook status. To me that is just silly, I mean to take a man's sole income because of a social networking high face is absurd. I think his article really gives a clear view of how people perceive social networks, and it also shows how petty these people really are. I mean I think that social networking should be taken somewhat seriously however there is no reason a person should be fired from their job for liking something. Now if they went of ranting on their own page about how much their company sucked and that their boss is involved in money laundering then there would be an issue worth addressing. It’s kind of like if your boyfriend likes a girls picture, but never publically posts that he is in a relationship with her then there is no reason to even bring it up! Good source though, it also helps that it was published this year in the United States, it adds to your creditability.
After careful evaluation of the socialmediaexplorer.com source, I have concluded that this particular source does qualify (barely) as a valid source. The publisher (socialmediaexplorer.com) is not terribly credible, however, they do hold some water in the realm of social media because of who they let publish on their website. The author of this particular source is certainly credible, as he is the CEO of a social media marketing agency. I have no reason to believe that the content of the source is inaccurate due to the credibility of the author. The audience and purpose of this source, as well, are certainly acceptable and do pertain to the assignment. Lastly, the currency of the article is fresh and up to date.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, I do believe the source is credible, it does have some flaws. Publisher, as mentioned before, isn't the strongest. There is some bias, also, apparent throughout the article as the author chimes in his own opinion on several occasions.
The pro's of the source's credibility outweigh the con's, therefore, the source is credible.
Justini,
ReplyDeleteThe social media explorer website is a website attempting to make money through providing advertising on it. This along with being a .com web address are two reasons that hinder the credibility of the website. Furthermore, the publisher is Social Media Explorer which decreases reliabilty.
The author, Adam Helweh is stated and there is a biography about him on the website which is beneficial, as it allows the audience to know who he is, what he does and any bias in the writing. The information provided and the way it is provided are both based on personal opinion which affects its reliability but also enhances the purpose of the website, the audience's enjoyment while reading and the success as a website.
The URL I read was http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/08/20/lonely-planet.html
ReplyDeleteAuthor: Johanna Cornblatt.
Publisher: Newsweek. Linked to Daily Beast website.
Purpose: The purpose for this article to is to discuss the increasing feelings of isolation and loneliness despite our growing population in the U.S. It compares real human interaction to social media interaction.
Bias: The bias in the article hints to the fact that we would be better off, in general, if we interacted with real people on a regular basis instead of living in a false and likely very unsatisfying artificial community.
Information included: Quotes from John T. Cacioppo, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago and coauthor of Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection; Duke University researcher; Harry Reis, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester; and Michael J. Bugeja, a professor of communications at Iowa State University and author of Interpersonal Divide: The Search for Community in a Technological Age.
I would have to say that both of your sources are credible. For one, they both went into depth on the subject, providing both research and statistics. Second: for the first source posted, information about the author is given at the bottom. It honestly helps to have that information within that source rather than Google their name and have a million results come up (which can also bring up people with the same name). I think the only source that I think is about 90% credible is the daily beast. the only reason I say this is because i don't know where they got some their information from. Was it done by someone else and they just used that info? did they do their own research/study?
ReplyDeleteThe article "When Does Social Media Interaction Become Human Expression?" is a valid source concerning free speech in social media. That being said, the article and the website/publishers have an obvious bias. The author runs a social media marketing agency which guarantees that he will have a bias for social media. The publishers of the web site are also involved in social media marketing. Both the author and the publishers have financial reasons to want social media to be protected. That being said, the article, although biased, is still highly relevant. The information appears to be accurate, and the subject matter highlights an important issue facing social media users.
ReplyDeleteThe URL I read was http://www.thedailybeast.com/newsweek/2009/08/20/lonely-planet.html
ReplyDeleteAuthor: Johanna Cornblatt.
Publisher: Newsweek. Linked to Daily Beast website.
Purpose: The purpose for this article to is to discuss the increasing feelings of isolation and loneliness despite our growing population in the U.S. It compares real human interaction to social media interaction.
Bias: The bias in the article hints to the fact that we would be better off, in general, if we interacted with real people on a regular basis instead of living in a false and likely very unsatisfying artificial community.
Information included: Quotes from John T. Cacioppo, a neuroscientist at the University of Chicago and coauthor of Loneliness: Human Nature and the Need for Social Connection; Duke University researcher; Harry Reis, professor of psychology at the University of Rochester; and Michael J. Bugeja, a professor of communications at Iowa State University and author of Interpersonal Divide: The Search for Community in a Technological Age.