Disinformation, Misinformation, & Fake News: Evaluating Sources

When you encounter any kind of source, consider:

1. Authority - Who is the author? What is their point of view? 
2. Purpose - Why was the source created? Who is the intended audience?
3. Publication & format - Where was it published? In what medium?
4. Relevance - How is it relevant to your research? What is its scope?
5. Date of publication - When was it written? Has it been updated?
6. Documentation - Did they cite their sources? Who did they cite?

Salmons, Janet E. 2021. Your Super Quick Guide to Learning Online. London: SAGE Publications.

Authority

• Who is the author?
• What else has the author written?
• In which communities and contexts does the author have expertise?
  • Does the author represent a particular set of world views? 
  • Do they represent specific gender, sexual, racial, political, social and/or cultural orientations?
  • Do they privilege some sources of authority over others?
  • Do they have a formal role in a particular institution (e.g. a professor at Oxford)? 

Purpose

• Why was this source created?
  • Does it have an economic value for the author or publisher? 
  • Is it an educational resource? Persuasive?
    • What (research) questions does it attempt to answer?
    • Does it strive to be objective?
  • Does it fill any other personal, professional, or societal needs?
• Who is the intended audience?
  • Is it for scholars?
  • Is it for a general audience?

Publication & format

• Where was it published?
• Was it published in a scholarly publication, such as an academic journal?
  • Who was the publisher? Was it a university press?
  • Was it formally peer-reviewed?​
• Does the publication have a particular editorial position?
  • Is it generally thought to be a conservative or progressive outlet?
  • Is the publication sponsored by any other companies or organizations? Do the sponsors have particular biases?
• Were there any apparent barriers to publication?
  • Was it self-published?
  • Were there outside editors or reviewers?
• Where, geographically, was it originally published, and in what language?
• In what medium?
  • Was it published online or in print? Both?
  • Is it a blog post? A YouTube video? A TV episode? An article from a print magazine?
    • What does the medium tell you about the intended audience? 
    • What does the medium tell you about the purpose of the piece?

Relevance

• How is it relevant to your research?
  • Does it analyze the primary sources that you're researching?
  • Does it cover the authors or individuals that you're researching, but different primary texts?
  • Can you apply the authors' frameworks of analysis to your own research?
• What is the scope of coverage?
  • Is it a general overview or an in-depth analysis?
  • Does the scope match your own information needs?
  • Is the time period and geographic region relevant to your research?

Date of Publication 

• When was the source first published?
• What version or edition of the source are you consulting?
  • Are there differences in editions, such as new introductions or footnotes?
  • If the publication is online, when was it last updated?
• What has changed in your field of study since the publication date? 
• Are there any published reviews, responses or rebuttals?

Documentation 

• Did they cite their sources?
  • If not, do you have any other means to verify the reliability of their claims?
• Who do they cite?
  • Is the author affiliated with any of the authors they're citing?
  • Are the cited authors part of a particular academic movement or school of thought?
• Look closely at the quotations and paraphrases from other sources:
  • Did they appropriately represent the context of their cited sources?
  • Did they ignore any important elements from their cited sources?
  • Are they cherry-picking facts to support their own arguments?
  • Did they appropriately cite ideas that were not their own?