Criteria of Analysis

Here is my opinion on four websites and how I analyzed them to check their credibility, opinions, and reputation.

The first site I looked at was the AirCongress, which contained all political news.  The first article that pops up seems more a gossip column rather then a news story, but when you click on the about section, it seems more reputable then I would think.  Still, its sources are unclear, yet all attached to the government.  One source is referred to as "government watchdogs".  It kind of sounds like TMZ to me.  Okay, so TMZ might be a bit extreme, because they do have some good articles as well.

Next, I went to Dave Barry's blog, and all of his blogs, while comical, seemed to actually be true.  I looked up a bit about Dave to see if it credible or not, and he actually has a very impressive and successful track record.  He has even won a Pulitzer prize for commentary.  He seems to be producing credible humor!

Then I went to the IMC (independent media center).  While at first glance, the websites set-up is a bit childish, which a bad color scheme and layout, the articles seem to be hard news.  Everything is surrounding worldly affairs, and political issues.  Then once in the about section, its credibility seems to run out.  There are no real sources, only a description of the "radical, accurate, and passionate" writers of the IMC.  This makes me wonder if it is opinion/biased news.

Finally I checked out the slate as my last site, and the first big article that pops up is a about president Bush and it is entitled "A Riddle Wrapped in a Mystery Inside a Moron".  This made me have to thing that it was fluff news.  There was also a "boob tube" article and one about a submarine containing the fate of the world.  when looking through the about us section, I found that even though they do refer to their news as "witty", there is some fairly strong staff members, and beliefs. The website does however, look fairly professional.