Evaluation of General Sources

After searching through several pages of Google results for biological research controversies I found two sources that I wanted to evaluate further. In this post I will evaluate two websites that discuss the controversy of using embryonic stem cells for medical research. 


The first website, Vox Science and Health has an article called "Stem cells were one of the biggest controversies in 2001. Where are they now?". 

• URL: The URL ends in .com which implies that it is a generic website and has no real scholarly background to it. More times than not this indicates the website as not being a very credible source. 

• Author: The author is Suzannah Locke and she provides her twitter account on the article. She is the associate editor of Voxdotcom, and was previously the associate editor for Popular Science.  Suzzanah appears to be qualified as a writer for science news articles, but does not have the credibility of a doctor or professor in the science fields. 

• Last Updated: The website was last updated December 15, 2014 at 9:10 am ET. While this website is almost a year old, it shows that it is credible due to the accurate time listed for when it was updated. All of the links that provide further information are still functioning, as well as the link to her twitter and email. 

• Purpose: The text is trying to inform the general public, who has little to no knowledge of the topic, about the embryonic stem cell research controversy and if the controversy still really exists today. 

• Graphics: The initial image at the top of the article appears to depict the procedure of extracting embryonic stem cells, but is unclear because there are no captains. The image uses very vibrant colors, yet is very simplistic. There is also a cited picture, graph, a political cartoon, and a map included throughout the article. Overall, all of the graphics relate and help enhance the points made in the article. 

• Position on Subject: The text is solely informational and does not give any bias towards the authors opinion because both sides of the argument are given. There are many other articles on the internet that provide the same information about the controversy and give similar arguments on both sides.

• Links: There are multiple links directing readers to sites that provide more information on the topic such as news articles, Wikipedia sources, and other science websites. At the end of the text, the author lists links for further reading on the subject. Also, there are direct quotes from reputable authorities within the health and medical field.  

"Understanding Stem Cells." Faculty Findings. 2013 via SF State Magazine. San Francisco State University. 

The second website, News Medical Life Sciences and & Medicine, has an article called "Stem Cell Controversy."

• URL: The URL ends in .net which implies that the website is a more scholarly page. This indicates that the website is probably a credible source. 

• Author: The author is Dr. Anaya Mandal, MD, and based off of her title she seems like a very qualified person to write an article concerning a medical issue. Dr. Mandal has written several other articles on News Medical, but there was no personal information about her on the internet. 

• Last Updated: The article was last updated January 29, 2013 and all of the links work properly. However, two years is a long time for a news article to be in circulation. While the context is credible, the article seems a little out of date. 

• Purpose: The text is trying to inform the general public about the embryonic stem cell research controversy, and the multiple aspects to this controversy. There is no other purpose to this text than to educate people. 

• Graphics: There are no images directly on the article, but all of the linked sources contain visuals that relate to the topic of embryonic cell research. I am surprised to not see any visuals, and the lack of graphics does take away from the article. 

• Position on Subject: The text is only informational and does not give any one-sided opinions. The author's opinion is not apparent because both sides of the argument are given. There are many other online articles and sources that provide concurrent information with that of this article. 

• Links: There is one in-text link to another article by the same author further discussing stem cells. There are links to suggested further readings and related stories. Also, there are several listed citations that verify the information used in the text.