Finding Credible Sources in These Wild Times We're Living In
 |
| C'mon, you know you'd click. |
*Sigh* where do I even begin? My lecture on credible sources
used to be so succinct and cute. I had a little acronym (courtesy of some awesome
librarians) that helped explain how to tell in an online source was credible.
CRAP. Currency, Relevance/Reliability, Authority/Audience, Purpose/Point of
View. (link for those who want to know more). Sure, the acronym really should’ve
been CRRAAPP, but it was a simpler time.
It can be easy to roll our eyes as our Aunt Kimothy shares yet
another clickbait article about scientists secretly plotting to a coup so that
killer whales can finally take their rightful place as our overlords.
But there
are real, important issues at play here.
Fake news, biased articles, and flat-out propaganda are harder and harder to distinguish from good, fact-based journalism. Part of this is because of how the internet has evolved. Very few people get their news from print anymore, so the internet is the place to go. But the internet doesn’t have to go through fact-checkers, editors, etc. (although many sites certainly do have stringent editing mechanisms in place). Also, there is a huge financial incentive for content creators to write clickbait articles. Some are accurate with clickbait titles like “You’ll Never Believe What This Ghost Said to Tom Cruise” but some are purposefully inaccurate in an attempt to get people like Aunt Kimothy to hit the “share” button and spread that puppy around, generating advertising revenue with each sucker who clicks. The people behind these types of articles like these Macedonian teens who are in the game to pay for their guitar equipment or this liberal dude who built a fake news empire with fake pro-Trump/anti-Hillary content.
Fake news, biased articles, and flat-out propaganda are harder and harder to distinguish from good, fact-based journalism. Part of this is because of how the internet has evolved. Very few people get their news from print anymore, so the internet is the place to go. But the internet doesn’t have to go through fact-checkers, editors, etc. (although many sites certainly do have stringent editing mechanisms in place). Also, there is a huge financial incentive for content creators to write clickbait articles. Some are accurate with clickbait titles like “You’ll Never Believe What This Ghost Said to Tom Cruise” but some are purposefully inaccurate in an attempt to get people like Aunt Kimothy to hit the “share” button and spread that puppy around, generating advertising revenue with each sucker who clicks. The people behind these types of articles like these Macedonian teens who are in the game to pay for their guitar equipment or this liberal dude who built a fake news empire with fake pro-Trump/anti-Hillary content.
We
know that fake news (as in journalism based in falsehoods, not
journalism a certain someone disagrees with) and extreme bias is
everywhere. How do
we sniff out that putrid, stinking rat? (What a gross expression. My
bad!)
Here are four types of sites/articles to keep an eye out for
(courtesy of Dr. Melissa Zimdars):
- “Fake, false, regularly misleading sites” which rely on “outrage” using distorted headlines and decontextualized or dubious information in order to generate likes, shares, and profits” (examples: Politicalo, AmericanNews.com)
- Websites that may circulate misleading and/or potentially unreliable information (examples: ConsciousLifeNews.com, CountdownToZeroTime.com)
- These websites sometimes use clickbait-y headlines and social media descriptions (examples: BipartisanReport.com, TheFreeThoughtProject.com
- Purposefully fake satire/comedy sites that can offer critical commentary on politics and society, but have the potential to be shared as actual/literal news (examples: Christwire.org, TheOnion.com)
 |
| Give them their Pulitzer! |
Here are some tips
for routing out bad info (also courtesy of Dr. Melissa Zimdars):
- Avoid websites that end in “lo” ex: Newslo (above). These sites specialize in taking a piece of accurate information and then packaging that information with other false or misleading “facts.”
- Watch out for websites that end in “.com.co” as they are often fake versions of real news sources.
- Watch out if known/reputable news sites are not also reporting on the story. Sometimes lack of coverage is the result of corporate media bias and other factors, but there should typically be more than one source reporting on a topic or event.
- Odd domain names generally equal odd and rarely truthful news.
- Lack of author attribution may, but not always, signify that the news story is suspect and requires verification.
- Check the “About Us” tab on websites or look up the website on Snopes or Wikipedia for more information about the source.
- If the story makes you REALLY ANGRY it’s probably a good idea to keep reading about the topic via other sources to make sure the story you read wasn’t purposefully trying to make you angry (with potentially misleading or false information) in order to generate shares and ad revenue.
- It’s always best to read multiple sources of information to get a variety of viewpoints and media frames. Some sources not specifically included in this list (although their practices at times may qualify them for addition), such as The Daily Kos and Fox News, vacillate between providing legitimate, problematic, and/or hyperbolic news coverage, requiring readers and viewers to verify and contextualize information with other sources
 |
| Uh oh, she needs step #7! |
So
here’s your assignment for this post—copy and paste the
link a non-credible news article. Do NOT choose an Onion or Clickhole
article (too obviously satire at this point). Your pick can be as
blatant or as camouflaged as you’d
like. Along with the link, I’d like you to provide a paragraph response
explaining how you could tell this source wasn’t legitimate. What about
it made
you question its veracity? When you’ve done this, also respond to one
other
classmate’s post, adding your take on the linked article they provided.
Did you
think it was not credible? Were you fooled?
https://www.21cpw.com/shock-poll-trump-blue-collar-support-highest-since-fdr-in-1930s/
ReplyDeleteThis is a article originally published by a site known as prntly.com . There is no other sources on the internet supporting what the author is talking about. Also, there is no citations for the information given, even though the author uses a very large amount of statistics.
I completely agree, this article lacks sources, facts, and statistics. It's more of an observation or assumption than it is a fact that more blue collar workers support Trump, this isn't credible at all! - Leighton Dennie
DeleteI agree that this article does not seem credible. It is lacking citations for all of the statistics the author uses. The only source listed is prntly.com which doesn’t seem that credible either. If you click on the link it takes you to an expired website.
DeleteI agree with you, the article looks like assumptions rather than researchable facts. Also, there aren't any citation listed below to support the source.
Deletehttps://rwer.wordpress.com/2011/03/17/putting-usa-inequality-on-the-map/
ReplyDeleteThis passage tried to put in inequality level on the map. The author utilized deep and shallow colors to indicate each rigion’s phenomenon of the inequality in education. However, I consider the writer showed a blurry view about this problems and haven’t pointed out the relevance source after showing a huge amounts of information. Hence, I don’t think it’s a reliable source for us to look up.
https://consciouslifenews.com/analysis-shows-top-1-gained-21-trillion-in-wealth-since-1989-while-bottom-half-lost-900-billion/11170675/
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the unequal wealth distribution in the U.S. but exaggerates just how extreme the parameters are by saying the top 1% gained $21 trillion and the bottom 50% lost $900 billion. I mainly questioned this because those numbers are very extreme and while the wealth distribution is skewed, it is not skewed entirely that much. Along with this, the article only included one chart and the rest of it was just quotes of tweets from people saying the wealth distribution is unequal, but no actual evidence. - Leighton Dennie
I agree with you on this, these numbers are way out there and they do not really have any statistics behind these "facts."
DeleteI agree with you. The conclusions cited in this article lack a credible source, many of which are the author's personal views.
DeleteI agree with you, the article lacks credibility. The article does not establish that Matt Bruenig is a reliable person to review the data and give an accurate analysis.
Deletehttps://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/02/the-food-babe-enemy-of-chemicals/385301/?utm_source=atlfb
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about nutrition facts in cereal and how it is not true at all and the food companies are lying to us to buy their product. I think this is not true as the FDA handles these types of problems and takes them very seriously.
I agree with you on this because the FDA doesn't take things like this very lightly, also it doesn't really look like they got their information from a reliable source
DeleteI think we as a society would not accept if the FDA was not stringent with it's rules. They govern the things we put in our bodies, it is a very serious matter.
Deletehttps://www.livescience.com/science-of-rick-and-morty.html
ReplyDeleteHere is an article I found that appear to be a popularization of science. I first took a look at the Term of this website. They claim that they provide no guarantee to any content that be published on their website, so we can tell that we lost the credibility of this website at very beginning Then I looked over the article, and I found that it was written based on an animation, with few quotation of others and serving no any evidence or source to support most of claim made by the author. As reasons above, I would suggest that this article is incredible and cannot be used as source for research and study.
I agree with you. Credible sources are usually from masters or at least some scholars in the websites which are famous and professional. Google search are supposed to be a good place to find credible sources.
Deletehttps://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/scottlucas/facebooks-voter-turnout-machine-could-be-trumps-secret?ref=bfnsplash
ReplyDeleteFor starters, this article was originally published by Buzzfeed News. While perhaps housing more diligent reporters and better editors than many other sites, it is no secret that Buzzfeed is an extremely biased news source. Additionally, the headline is a little on the clickbait-y side of the spectrum and the article content takes advantage of the Facebook x 2016 Election controversy.
I would agree that buzzfeed isn't reliable. Like you said, they are too biased and post info that isn't always backed.
DeleteI agree with you that the title of an article with clickbait is just to catch the reader's eye and get more reading, but the content of the article is not very reliable.
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you. For the first reason is where the source come from which make it a credible sources . Secondly, who wrote this article can also be an important thing to determine whether this source is credible or not.
Deletehttps://www.theguardian.com/science/brain-flapping/2014/nov/25/climate-change-is-an-obvious-myth-how-much-more-evidence-do-you-need
ReplyDeleteSo first off, the title of the article is clearly created to grasp the attention of viewers. The author explains that climate change is a myth but does not back up any of their claims with sources or scientific information. They combat each consequence of climate change (water levels rising, extreme weather, etc.) with an opinionated response, rather than fighting it with any facts. With no sources or evidence to help them get their point across, the author does not leave themselves in a credible position.
I believe that this article is supposed to be satirical and that the author is purposely being obnoxious, as the author links to many credible sources supporting the climate change theory within the article.
Deletehttps://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hayesbrown/trump-russia-mueller-obsession-ukraine-impeachment-inquiry
ReplyDeleteBuzzfeed is known as the website you can go to to take tests to find out which movie character you are or the 31 ways to save money at Starbucks. This would not be the type of source to use to find credible news information. I believe this article is not reliable because it has a very liberal viewpoint. For a website to be credible it should have unbiased, accurate information.
I am familiar with Buzzfeed and definitely agree that it is not a reliable source. They tend to post about tons of different topics and have no consistency within them.
DeleteI agree that BuzzFeed is very unreliable, especially because of its posed bias.
Deletehttps://www.huffpost.com/entry/essential-oils_l_5d93a00de4b0019647b010df
ReplyDeleteThe subtitle said that many experts say essential oils cannot live up to health claims, but it is not showing any experts' names and any published research articles to validate this article. Meanwhile, the article said essential oils may have placebo effect and can cause nasty side effects, which also lack of credible source to support. Although we do not have enough science on effectiveness, it is irresponsible to say that they are useless.
Yeah, I agree with you at this point. Since this website decides to hide the author information, it somehow suggests that anyone has chance to publish their ideas on this website without concerning responsible issue. The articles they published could be based on bias and even error information.
Deletehttps://www.huzlers.com/blake-griffin-smacks-justin-bieber-hollywood-starbucks/
ReplyDeleteThe article is clearly fake because it does not provide an author and the wording of the article is not conditional compared to a normal news article. Also, I have not seen or heard of this from anywhere, so clearly they are just trying to pose clickbait. The whole website seems like they just post for clickbait and of completely untrue articles.
I agree with you. Besides, this red font color in the article really hurts my eyes. I think I am fooled by this article...
DeleteI agree that this looks horribly fake. If this really happened it would have been all over social media. The formatting of the article also looks really bad.
Deletehttp://xroads.virginia.edu/~ug02/newyorker/class.html
ReplyDeleteIn my perspective, this article is obviously fake, because this article does not have the name of the author, date published, and the citations. There are no researches, data, or any evidence menntioned in the article. This aritcle is all about the personal opinions about social class in America in the 1930s.
I agree with you, anything the author wrote in this article have no source. we can not find out whether his evidence is reliable or not. the author can just make it up on his own.
Deletehttps://consciouslifenews.com/toxic-glyphosate-found-in-most-foods-and-water-supplies/11175785/
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the toxic glyphosate in our food supply. It looks credible at first glance because they uses clear sturcture and citations to other articles. However, if you thinks a little bit more, you would find that the logic of this article sounds funny. The writer exaggerates the relationship between toxic glyphosate and phosphate fertilizers. It even sounds like a conspiracy...
https://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2018/jan/16/americannewscom/oprahs-comments-about-race-2013-bbc-interview-dist/
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how AmericanNews.com said Oprah said that "All white people have to die" but she actually didn't say that. Her comment was different but some one who rephrased it put it in a negative context. Also if you watch the video you can tell they don"t show her saying anything all they do is post pictures and write stuff them selves.
This is comical, the fact that the author thinks people would believe Oprah would say such a thing is ridiculous. Often, reporters will twist anything and everything a celebrity says to create a clickbait-y article for money.
DeleteBlog post
ReplyDeletehttps://americasfreedomfighters.com/barry-soetoro-i-d-s-and-photos-you-need-to-see-this/
This news article said that President Obama was a foreign student in Columbia University with the name “Barry Soetoro” , the article also pointed out that Obama was born in Kenya, so he was not a natural-born U.S citizen. For all picture proof, there is no references, no resource we can trace. We can not prove the picture is real, especially they look unclear.
This site is so bad that they seem to actually be helping you determine that everything on it is fake without actually stating that. I've looked at a lot of sites for this assignment and this the most blatant one I’ve seen. It's a great find!
DeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
Deletehttp://ww1.breaking-cnn.com/
ReplyDeleteTo start, the first thing that most people catch is the CNN, making it seem like it’s a trustworthy news source. Yet this is obviously false if you visit the site. It was mimicked to catch people’s attention. It was primary know to produce numerous death hoaxes. Just visiting the site, you can tell it’s poorly constructed and is not reliable. Also, the “ww1” is a alarming start when looking at the URL.
I feel like the number of fake links out there for legitimate news sources only grows. Whenever I check social media, I see a bunch of these links shared by people.
DeleteThis got me for a second, upon first glance it looked to me as if the dash was a period (which would make the site legitimate). It's a bit scary to think that something so small could appear to be real to those who fail to investigate further.
Deletehttps://www.breitbart.com/clips/2019/10/02/hillary-clinton-trump-knows-that-hes-an-illegitimate-president/
ReplyDeleteBreitbart is known as a notoriously biased source of news. The article looks like it took someone five minutes to throw together, and they provided no context on the quotes that they chose. Also, if one sees this article on the homepage, they see that they refer to Hillary Clinton as "Bitter Hillary". When someone's bias is that overt, it is impossible to create quality journalism. Breitbart has thrived off of creating clickbait, and inciting their base with false narratives and caricatures of anyone (besides Trump) that they can find.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.express.co.uk/news/science/1184592/NASA-news-black-hole-Jupiter-NASA-Juno-pictures-JunoCam-images
ReplyDeleteThis article has a headline that proclaims that a Black Hole has appeared on the surface of Jupiter. It is a sensationalized click-bait headline to attract readers. The article informs the reader that the black hole is actually just a shadow. Calling it a black hole is just to make it more scary and click-worthy. The information within the article seems to be sound, the article quotes NASA and other credible organizations, but there does not appear to be any formal citations listed.
http://realnewsrightnow.com/2019/07/peta-joins-movement-to-storm-area-51-plans-to-free-them-aliens-from-captivity/
ReplyDeleteThis article is well put together and looks legit. One could assume that it's fake from the title alone, though a quick google search reveals that nobody else is talking about this. This website produces a lot of satire content. Even their about page suggests that this is real.
I fully back you in stating that this article is fake. There was never a chance that PETA would join in on a largely illegal movement that goes against all military and government requests. This article was probably made to add to the "meme" surrounding the area 51 raid and to try to encourage more people to participate.
Deletehttps://www.cnn.com/2019/10/01/opinions/mark-zuckerberg-facebook-elizabeth-warren-rushkoff/index.html
ReplyDeleteI am not going to come out and 100% say that this story is wrong, but I can say that the journalist is talking one conversation with Zuckerberg and taking presumptions from previous acts to assume what he is thinking about this topic. There is no evidence stating this opinion is incorrect, but having a large news organization such as CNN making assumptions about a person's preferences is not a good move and falsely persuades readers into having a different opinion on Zuckerberg.
On Facebook, there are articles about roller coaster carts derailing but they are actually a way to get you to click the link so that the website can try to capture some of your passwords. I couldn't find the link to the roller coaster accidents article but here is an article explaining what the scam is.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.welivesecurity.com/2014/04/29/facebook-roller-coaster-accident-scam-spreads-fast/
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.exposingsatanism.org/nasty-nancy-pelosi-is-a-practicing-catholic-witch/
ReplyDeleteThe web address indicates that this may not be a reputable news source. For example, it isn’t NBC or the New Yorker. The writer of this article uses a quote from another source where Nancy Pelosi speaks about feeling the spirits of former women’s rights activists and manipulates the perspective to make a conjecture that she is admitting she is possessed by these spirits which they compare to demons. This is also the basis for not only stating she is a witch, but also a necromancer who is possessed. In addition to an altered image which make Pelosi look like the Wicked Witch of the West from Wizard of Oz there are bible references throughout the page, which indicate the leaning of the author and that they are biased.
The web address has to be the biggest indicator that it is satire. But it is also rather obvious that it is making fun of people after reading the first line. It seems that someone in conservative based created the website to mock the Democrats.
Deletehttps://www.cnn.com/2019/10/02/asia/beijing-hong-kong-national-day-intl-hnk/index.html
ReplyDeleteIn this article, the author writes that the Chinese people are immersed in the joy of the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China, while ignoring the grim situation of the riot in Hong Kong.The author only vilifies the Chinese people with his own subjective opinions.In the article, the author only describes his own opinions without providing some favorable evidence to prove them. Such an article is not credible.
http://www.chroniclemag.com/2018/09/25/volvo-experiments-with-mass-electric-vehicle-technology/
ReplyDeleteIn this article, the author writes about how Volvo is getting rid of the on-board battery of the car and using the road (a trench in the center with an electrical conduit that is powered by solar energy) to power it instead. I figured out it was satire after searching up the names cited in the article. The chief engineer's and the vice president of research names are incorrect.
http://www.druglibrary.org/SCHAFFER/history/CASEY1.htm
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about the history of drug use and drug users in the United States. Author has identified drugs' origin and its development, which provides a lot of information to readers. Author also wrote down each different drugs' functions and growth, and provide the references as well. However, this article has published in 1987, which has many out dated information. This cannot be selected as credible source.
https://www.infowars.com/planned-parenthood-unveils-mega-clinic-built-in-secret/
ReplyDeleteThis article claims that Planned Parenthood constructed a "massive" new facility under the name of a different company. However, the article seems to be purely speculative with the only person quoted being the Illinois Right to Life Executive Director. The name of the shell company used is also never brought up.
http://archive.is/gFCHa
ReplyDeleteClearly, this is fake. Just by looking at the site address you should be able to tell. Archive.is should not come off as a trustworthy site. There is no proof or even links to other credible sources about the death. If Jennifer Lopez were to suffer a crash like this, it would be aired on every news station around the world. The picture used of the crash looks like it was taken directly out of a google image search of "crash".
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/hamedaleaziz/trump-administration-dna-samples-immigrants
ReplyDeleteThis article talks about how President Trump plans to DNA test undocumented immigrants that are currently being detained. I would consider this an unreliable article because it comes from BuzzFeed, which is not really a reliable news source, and there are not any sources listed by the author.
I agree with you that this is clearly fake. I see buzzfeednews articles all over the place and they are generally clickbait titles that are fake and extreme and only meant to get a reaction out of people.
Deletehttps://www.bustle.com/articles/137865-8-reasons-meat-is-bad-for-you-yes-even-chicken
ReplyDeleteThis article, and even the title of the website, Bustle.com, reminds me of something you would see in the fake magazines in the checkout isles at stores. Reading through this article was pretty hilarious to me because while some of the arguments had a little truth to them, most of the points made used extremely biased charts and statistics meant to "shock" people into taking their side. This article was also written by a single author making it seem overall less credible.
https://jobs-post.blogspot.com/2018/12/muslim-figure-we-must-have-pork-free.html?fbclid=IwAR2IccWYz0ylasaSi0N3zop4Mv7nTng_QMhrfsbzr-U84uwBMGMcTj9IE3A
ReplyDeleteThis headline leads multiple sites’ stories featuring photographs of different women, all unnamed, wearing head coverings traditionally worn by Muslims. The piece never mentions the Muslim figure again or the claim. Instead, it recounts a mayor’s effort to ban school menus that exclude pork, a meat that is forbidden under Islamic dietary law, and presented President Donald Trump’s travel ban visitors from several Muslim-majority nations as “an ideal solution.” The mayor named in the piece is from France, not the U.S., and the controversy in France is in no way connected to the U.S. travel ban.
https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/02/politics/joe-biden-gun-control-plan/index.html
ReplyDeleteThe source talks solely about one individual pros. To be unbiased a good article will present the pros and cons of both sides. This is not seen in this article. This is also from a cite that is known to be biased on the liberal side of things. While it may provide some true information there is nothing to help provide credibility to the whole of the article and prove that it is not unbiased.
I agree with you that this article is not so credible. From my point of view, the article is just from personal ideas instead of comprehensive ideas. Also, the advertisements on the website also decrease the credibility of this article.
DeleteI feel any news channel to be considered central they have to be unbiased. But CNN is known to be biased towards the left and there is Fox news which is more towards the right wing. If you want a central opinion there are different news publishers you want to check.
Deletehttps://www.businessinsider.com/why-we-eat-dessert-last-2016-11
ReplyDeleteI searched the information about the reason for people taking sweet deserts at the last moment. through google browser. This website possess a lot of advertisements and it is picture-based article, which will looks unprofessional. Also, the explanation of the article is also not so comprehensive.
https://theweek.com/articles/717294/wealth-inequality-even-worse-than-income-inequality
ReplyDeleteThis article focuses on the unequal wealth distribution in the United States. I don't think there seems to be any obvious problem with the conclusions and data of this article. The author also provides links in this article. However, when I entered the link provided by the author, I found that the author's data source was another article written by him. That is to say, there is no reliable data source in this article.
i'm doubt about this article whether it is unreliable. I can see this author uses many statistics but he/she doesn't cite any of them. This means he/she could just probably made these data and let the article become unreliable.
DeleteI also agree as if he is only citing other websites he wrote it make shim celepelty unreliable. Since they only use their own data and no one else it seems clear that they are trying to screw numbers in there own way to convince people they are right.
Deletehttp://now8news.com/woman-arrested-training-squirrels-attack-ex-boyfriend/
ReplyDeleteThis news talked about a woman trained squirrels to attake her ex-boyfreind and finally got arrested. Obviousely, this is a fake news. Not only because the rediculous story itself, but also this article does not have any claimed resources come from. If you just searched the keywords like "woman trained squirrels attake", you can find there are lots of websites telling you that this is actually a fake news.
I totally agree with you. Some newspaper offices always creates many absurd news to attract reader's eyes. It doesn't involve truth and source.
Deletehttps://empiresports.co/super-bowl-50-to-be-played-in-ireland-nfl-fans-outraged/
ReplyDeleteI found this article to be kind o funny even though it was written many years ago. The article talks about a where the next super bowl is going to be located and saying fans were outraged. Being a sports fan I could tell this easily was fake as it was using fake names in the article but if it was someone who did not know the nfl as well it could have fooled them
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/summeranne/morality-didnt-turn-people-vegan-capitalism-might
ReplyDeleteThis news talks about how vegans cannot convince enough people to avoid meat. So now they are approaching fast food chains to introduce vegan friendly products. This news might be true but I would not trust it as buzz feed news is known to be biased and the news article did not have citation nor any data from trustworthy source. It is a randomly put up article about vegans joining big fast food chains.
https://www.politico.com/news/2019/10/01/republicans-trump-china-anniversary-015290
ReplyDeleteThis news talked about that Republicans split with Trump on celebrating China. It always accused Trump but didn't provide the evidence that rebulicans have a conflict with Trump. In this way, its title is exaggerated and intentionally attracts readers' eyes.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/salvadorhernandez/anti-vax-protester-human-blood-california-senate?ref=bfnsplash
ReplyDeleteBuzzfeeds is not really know for its news. However the title is really outrages and not really that believable, they don't really show any factual evidence to back their claims, like anyone can say something like this happened,
https://www.usatoday.com/story/sponsor-story/motley-fool/2019/03/11/amazon-ceo-says-his-company-will-go-bankrupt/3136669002/
ReplyDeleteThe title of this article makes it sound like Jeff Bezos said that the company is going out of business today when in reality he said that one day in the distant future, Amazon will go out off business. The author clearly chose that title in order to generate clicks. Even though it was from a famous website it was still misleading.
I agree with USA Today using Clickbait and it goes to show that even major publishers have less than desirable tactics to increase viewers. But we kind of know that the article wouldn't be legit just because of how much of a powerhouse Amazon is.
Deletehttps://www.infowars.com/chinese-missiles-can-now-annihilate-america/
ReplyDeleteThis article is a example of Clickbait. Once you click the link, the article talks about things that are not related to the title. For example, it talks about how more Chinese opioids are making it's way into the US and how Active-Duty military suicides is at an all time high. This tactic is used to try and villianize China and make it seem like the US militia is becoming weaker. They then talk about the missiles that China has and China stated that "Their missiles are powerful enough to wipe out all democracies in the world". This is not a direct threat or statement towards the United Stated but InfoWars plays it off as such. This is the prime example of what Clickbaiting is.
https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/venessawong/how-to-prepare-for-a-recession
ReplyDeleteThis article is about how to prepare for a recession. In the article it talks about how Millennial and younger should begin to prepare for a downturn in our economy. They basically said that your parents will give you poor advice about finding a job in this economy. While some elders are uneducated on the current job market, Buzzfeed has a habit of vilifying older people in favor of the youth.