Source evaluations


Here are my source evaluations:

Interview With Lachlan Campbell

Location Of Source: Digital Interview

Date Accessed: 23/09/2020

Source Type: Primary

ATL Skills Used: Communication

Authority

The information is being presented through an interview with Lachlan Campbell. They are providing this information based on prior experience and their knowledge.

They are the Head of Storytelling @ Hack Club and they are studying Interactive Media Arts at New York University. They work on web design and development projects, mainly.

They’ve built popular activism projects that help raise awareness for important global issues. These include Predict COVID-19 & Gun Funded. Recently, they built a CO2 tracker which is very relevant to my project.

Whilst they aren’t your traditional expert, I would certainly consider them to be one. They’ve got loads of experience in telling stories through multimedia. They’ve built apps used by thousands of users around the world.

I think they’re views are important as they’re someone who knows how to connect with people about important global issues. They’re also a young person and climate change affects the youth the most.

Accuracy

We can’t verify the information, as the interview focused on collecting their experiences from telling stories about global issues.

However we can verify Lachlan’s experience, through their résumé and their GitHub profile (where they host their projects).

Objectivity

This was a very opinion based interview, due to the framing off my questions. When asking the questions, I wanted to get a really unique and insightful perspective. There was also an emotional aspect as I know that Lachlan cares a lot about environmental warming (like me).

There was also a personal bias, as we all have different experiences. However, I don’t think this is necessarily a bad thing.

As this wasn’t a fact-focus source I can’t verify them.

Currency

This information is quite recent as the interview only took place on the 23rd of September and Lachlan is very involved with the latest trends.

Value

I found it extremely valuable getting to speak to Lachlan, they’re a very good storyteller and their wisdom will help me succeed!

They provided very detailed answers that they had put a lot of effort into.

They have a lot of expirence with activism through technology.

Whilst facts help me better understand the situation, Lachlan has provided me with one of the kind advice. I’m super grateful that they took the time to help out.

A crash course on climate change, 50 years after the first Earth Day by the New York Times

Location Of Source: Digital Newspaper Article Series

Date Accessed: 20/09/2020

Source Type: Secondary

ATL Skills Used: Communication, Information & Media literacy

Authority

The information provided on the articles is sourced from seven pieces of written work by seven different New York Times correspondents / contributors.

The first is Henry Fountain, who’s been a Science reporter for 20 years at the New York Times and has written a book on the Alaskan earthquake of 1964 (a major climate anomaly). This makes them an expert as they have performed large amounts of research through their job.

The second is Kendra Pierre-Louis, who is a former climate writer for the New York Times. She has an M.A. in Sustainable Development with a focus on Policy Analysis and Advocacy which shows her abundance of knowledge, it also means she can provide a more policy-based perspective.

The third is Hiroko Tabuchi, she is also a climate writer for the New York Times. She has a Pulitzer Prize for Explanatory Reporting, this shows that the information she is providing is likely of high quality and easy to understand. Ms Tabuchi also has a background in Economics, this means she can analyze the economical aspect of climate change policy making her information unique.

The fourth is Brad Plumer, who covers efforts to fight back against climate change for the New York Times. They don’t have many credentials, however, they are well respected online and have hosted talks at universities such as Yale.

The fifth is Lisa Friedman, who is an experienced climate science journalist. She has led journalism teams and has spoken at World Bank events.

The sixth is Christopher Flavelle, who reports on institutional action to fight (or aid) global warming. He received a 2018 National Press Foundation award for coverage of the US federal government’s struggles to deal with flooding.

The seventh is Somini Sengupta explores how climate change affects communities through long form journalism. Her work has won her a George Polk Award.

All of the writers have credentials and have gained the respect of thousands of readers. They all have a lot of experience in journalism, with their specialties being in climate and science reporting.

Accuracy

The information provided by this source is verifiable and provable. I know this as I have been able to verify it through the referenced studies. For all the factual information logged in my research journal I have also fact checked them to confirm their legitimacy.

The authors have also linked the sources of all their studies used, this allows me to verify the sources and adds more legitimacy.

Objectivity

The information is based primarily with facts, however, the factual explanations have been entwined with analysis that is more opinion based. I must be careful when using the source to separate the two as whilst they both have value they need to be distinguished between.

The factual information is verifiable through the linked studies as well as independent fact checking, this ensures that they are accurate and truthful.

The opinion pieces do have bias as any opinion piece has, however each point is based on verifiable. The NYT has a slight political bias, leaning to the “left” according to allsides.com’s blind surveys (view).

The piece provides viewpoints from a diverse set of 7 different authors, so it certainly covers multiple point-of-views.

Currency

This article series began on Apr 19, 2020, and lasted for seven days. This date was provided by the publisher. I’m not sure about the latest time it was updated, however, it is now on the homepage for the NYT’s climate reporting so it is likely still maintained.

This means that the information is fairly relevant to the current subject, with current affairs being provided by other sources. This means it can be applied in my project.

Value

This source was incredibly valuable during my research process and will be valuable for my project. It was one of the first sources that I turned it to, and it provided me with a broad overview of the climate change situation.

For my project, it clearly defines takeaways that we can all learn from the current situation which I can transfer to my educational materials for my project. It also provides me with very clear factual information that I can communicate to my audience.