ENG 105 Topic 5

ENG 105 Topic 5 DQ 1 Go back to your readings in Chapter 4 of the text on bias. Reread the information to help you answer this question. Remember that bias can be found on a website. View the website noted here: What indications do you have that the site is biased or not biased? List three things that appear to make this site biased or unbiased. Finally, based on the criteria you have been learning about websites, do you believe this site is true and honest, or does it have an agenda? How might you address bias in your evaluation essay? During the week, go back and review your classmates’ posts and discuss similarities and differences between your response and your peers’ responses? This article was very hard for me to read and I found it very biased. The author is trying to get the reader to fall into the trap of emotion by trying to enrage people that the Holocaust did not exist, and that America is paying Israel billions of dollars a year in retributions, and with that hard-earned money, we would all be driving around in a Mercedes Benz. This is a bias statement because no evidence supports that claim. The author goes on to state that there was no evidence that cyanide was present in the scrapings of the gas chamber walls, where is the documentation or credible information to back that up? Finally, the author wants us to believe that through the extensive recording keeping of the Germans, their solutions were that of deportation, emigration and not of extermination (biblebelievers). Not one shred of credible evidence was cited, and the author uses his own thoughts, theories and emotions to convince the audience of his point of view. This site is nothing more than a conspiracy theory and the agenda is to buy into the nonsense to dispel the real truth behind the Holocaust. To keep my essay free of bias I needed to back up my research with credible sources and cite them. I need to address the opposing view to validate my argument. I also need to keep my essay free from opinions and personal thought. Resource: Hi Tami, Yes, exactly! Why do you think people fall prey to this type of writing? Why might some people be convinced by this webpage? Rebecca People who fall prey to this type of writing lack critical thinking skills or they do not apply them. I believe some people buy into hoaxes and fake news because they are searching for truth and justice. The most vulnerable are people who are the less skeptical and gullible. However, information can be so misleading and convincing that even very educated people can fall victim to it. That is why it is vital that people use their critical thinking skillset. The author makes such inflammatory statements to increase support for his own agenda, he entices people by triggering their emotions and the attention he gets manifests his behaviors. On some level we are all predisposed to be distrustful of our government, but in my opinion, people who believe this website are the same people who believe we never landed on the moon and that 9/11 was orchestrated by the government. Welcome to week 5! You have now chosen a website to evaluate for the Evaluative Writing Assignment (Review). After reviewing chapter 9 and the example review essay, answer one or all of the following questions: What is the difference between description and evaluation? Is there another evaluation of the website you have chosen? What does it say? What criteria are you using to evaluate the website? Reply substantively to any or all questions and receive participation credit! I am not sure if I have this right, but I think that the difference between evaluation and description is that evaluation means that you can make use of a criteria for deciding if one thing is better than the other and description means to help someone recognize or identify something. I chose the criteria of authority, objectivity, and coverage to evaluate the WebMD website. So this set of criteria will help me decode whether this is a credible site or not. DQ 2 One way to disagree with a review is to question the expectations, or criteria, that an author has for the subject of his or her review. Describe how well the website you have chosen for your evaluation essay meets your expectations/criteria. During the week, review your classmates’ posts and discuss similarities and differences between your response and your peers’ responses. The WebMD website met the criteria for authority because not only was it developed by medical professionals and other health experts, but it also included links to the medical doctors who reviewed each article, here you can read about their background and see their credentials. I also found that the objectivity criterion was met. The website clearly states the disclaimers for advertisements and other policies. It remained free from bias because everything was backed with statistics, data and research. The last of my chosen criteria was coverage. WebMD displayed coverage throughout their website with an easy to read format that included in-depth reference points that made it easy to navigate, in addition, it also has site maps and live links to videos and slideshows. Therefore, through my analysis of my chosen criteria I found that it met my expectations for a reliable source for ADHD. My chosen website, WebMD exceeded my expectations and met my criteria. The authority alone made me believe in what was stated, was trustworthy. This site was developed and is maintained by medical professionals and health experts, each of them had easy access to their credentials and background information. The site remained free of bias, citing all sources and backing up statements with research, statistics and data. I was also impressed to find out that not only is the website designed for the general public in mind, but also is utilized by doctors and nurses for up to date information. Based on my analysis, I would recommend to a person who was seeking information on ADHD, that this site was accurate and bound with truthful information. DQ 3 Provide a sample in-text citation that you plan to use in your evaluation essay you are currently writing. Use one of the head/body/tail combinations from our textbook (Chapter 2). Then create a second citation for the same source, but use a different head/body/tail combination. As the week progresses, comment on your class mates' in-text citations. Do you think they were cited correctly? Why or why not? How do different patterns create different impressions about the source? During the week, go back and review your classmates’ posts and discuss similarities and differences between your response and your peers’ responses? Keith Rager (2003), a web analyst, states that evaluating a website can be a challenge to distinguish fact from opinion, however, it is undisputable when credible resources are listed that express the facts of the information. When evaluating a website, it can be a challenge to distinguish fact from opinion, however, it is undisputable when credible resources are listed that express the facts of the information (Rager, 2003). According to Rager (2003), evaluating a website can be a challenge to distinguish fact from opinion, however, it is undisputable when credible resources are listed that express the facts of the information. Rager, K. B. (2003). Assessing the Quality of Internet Resources: Challenges and Useful Tools. Adult Learning, 14(4), 17-19. Retrieved from: