Blog Assignment 5

After reading John R. Henderson’s tutorial on how to recognize reliable websites vs. junk, I realized that many of my own web searches aren’t formatted properly. Research is far more efficient when you begin at a library website, rather than typing keywords into Google just because it is easier. Also, paying attention to the details of a website, currency, graphic presentation, good grammar, and correct spelling are easy things to look for that show the reliability of a website. Paying attention to the authors of the website is important, too, since these are the sources delivering the information.

After reading the tutorial, I visited a few websites to question whether or not the sites are reliable. Some sites seemed to be authoritative, like History.com’s “The 1960s.” I think this website can be held reliable for the information it publishes because the History channel is a well-known source for having accurately produced documentary and content. In addition, the content on the website was not out-of date. Also, the website has a sophisticated, advanced layout and a neatly organized graphic presentation, which seems to me was produced by an official webpage designer, not someone sitting at home in their basement. 

This was the vibe I got from “ThePsychedelic ‘60s.” Though the website URL says it is from Virginia libraries and is a “.edu” website, the layout seems to be very handmade, and has cheesy rainbow-colored graphics. Also, the links to information are labeled with strange headlines like “Illicit Drugs” and “Hippies,” and the descriptions of these are almost stereotypical and include curse words. Though the site appears to be from a reliable source, I probably would not trust the information according to Henderson’s tutorial.

Another sites headline, “Flower Power: An America 1960sMovement,” comes from www.proflowers.com, a site that I have used before to browse flowers online and send to a recipient. The flowers are nice, but is the content? The article “Flower Power” was written in 2010 by a source that I have never heard. However, the article does link to several different sites about the sixties. I am unsure if these websites are reliable, but as far as this particular webpage goes, I would trust that the information is probably right, but I wouldn’t base my research off it. Once again, this seems to be a commercial website, though not as cheesy as the “Psychedelic ‘60s,” this site seems to be using content to promote the sell of flowers rather to inform an audience.

“The American Cultural History” seems to be a reliable site because it is from a school library and is a “.edu” site. The information seems to be up to date, though it is mostly historical information. I think this is one of the few sites I would use to base research off of. The webpage is organized and the graphics seem appropriate for the webpage, and I don’t seem to recognize typos, which Henderson recommended we look out for.

“The Sixties” is also a school library website, fromMiami. This is a “.edu” website, so at first glance, I would think it is reliable. Then, I analyzed the graphics and the presentation of the website, which is organized and up to date. The website has the author’s names published on the first page, and very clearly. The authors are all recognized as “Dr.,” and have categories next to their names (History, English, and Biology) that reassures the viewer that the content of the website is coming from a reliable source. I would also use this site for research purposes.

The last website that I analyzed was “The SixtiesProject.” This website is from a Virginia school (another .edu website), that is headlines “Sixties Survivors,” “Scholars,” and “Casual Surfers.” The website seems very laidback, which makes me not trust it at first, but then the website provides links to bibliographic material, filmographies, primary documents, and book reviews- all of which appear to be reliable, trustworthy sources. The website doesn’t look professional and seems to be mostly directed towards commentary and audience interaction, which doesn’t always leave a lot of room for trustworthy texts. I would explore this site, but I would make sure the information I site seems trustworthy.