Evalutation of General Sources

GMOs are a source of major controversy within the field of engineering. The seed company, Monsanto, believes "weed resistant seeds" will be beneficial because farmers will be able to spray entire fields with herbicides, rather than targeting specific weeds. However, many believe this will only create weeds even more resilient, commonly called "super weeds." In the sources below, both articles discuss Monsanto and the controversy they present to the world of agriculture. 

Showtime. "Weed Logo." 7 April 2007 via Wikimedia. Public Domain Dedication. 

1. Source One [1]

• URL- the URL is "wired.com." This shows that this source is not a scholarly article and could contain bias as well as inaccurate information. However, it is a magazine that deals with various technology, so it pertains to the field of engineering. 
• Author- Brandon Keim is a journalist for Wired magazine. He's interested in various technology as well as culture; therefore, it could probably be assumed that he did his research before writing an article about genetically modified organisms. He has also written for other magazines, including National Geographic News, NOVA and Scientific American Mind. Therefore, he is rather qualified. On his Twitter account, he has around 7400 followers; in addition, his tweets are mostly science based.
• Last Updated- This article was last updated February 2, 2015. This is very recent and therefor contains up-to-date, trustworthy information. The hyperlinks provided redirect us to various sources containing more information about the conflict between Monsanto and the people; they are still working and all contain relevant information, all within the past few months. 
• Purpose- The purpose of this article is to mainly inform and entertain. Keim doesn't present bias either way; rather, he objectively presents the argument of what is happening within the conflict. He provides quotes from both Monsanto as well as specialists within the field of researching GMOs. 
• Graphics- There are graphics of plants and farms. They are trying to provide the reader with an image of what kind of plants are being modified and affected. 
• Position on Subject- Keim doesn't seem to be leaning one way or another. He just presents the events that are occurring without including his opinion. However, based on the facts presented, the people against GMO seeds would profit. We can verify the information with other news articles and even from the hyperlinks provided by the author. 
• Links- Keim does include hyperlinks so the reader can further investigate and fully educate themselves on the controversy. He even quotes reputable scientists and researchers throughout, providing concrete facts against GMOs. 

2. Source Two [2]

• URL- This article comes for "nationofchange.org." Because it is a ".org", the site is automatically more credible than a regular ".com." It is reliable because the organization must filter and review everything published on this website before it is actually published. 
• Author- The author is Martin Edwards. He is a novelist as well as critic; therefore, he is well versed in writing. In addition, he has publish many legal books, which proves he is legalistic and thus subjective. 
• Last Updated- This article was last updated on November 21, 2013. Even though that was a few years ago, the article is still reliable because it isn't too far back. However, this article could have been written before the controversy had time to develop or even settle. There aren't any links provided for further research. 
• Purpose- The purpose of this article is to explain how Monsanto's genetically modified seeds are "no new controversies." Edwards argues that ever since the founding of Monsanto, they have had a "dark past" of artificial products; for example, artificial sweeteners. Essentially, Edwards says that this should have been expected from Monsanto and isn't a new issue.
• Position on Subject- Edwards clearly implements bias within this article. He provides many examples of Monsanto's "dark past" and how they have never been a moral company. If viewers agree with his bias, then Monsanto will suffer because they will lose support. 
• Links- Edwards doesn't provide any working hyperlinks in his article. Therefore, the chance t further investigate is the reader's responsibility. This consecrates the authors bias even more because he doesn't provide outside sources.