Source Credibility
A blog post written by an anonymous author with no references
Weakness – lacks author credibility
Claim supported by statistics from a survey
Strength – uses data as evidence
News article from a company selling tech products
Weakness – possible commercial bias
Source talks about AI impact on jobs in 2024
Strength – relevant to modern issue
Uses emotional words like “dangerous” and “disaster”
Weakness – emotive language
A government report with recent statistics and citations
Strength – reliable and evidence-based
Claim supported by “many people say…”
Weakness – vague evidence
Report written by an independent NGO
Strength – less biased perspective
Source discusses telephones in 1995
Strength – relevant to modern issue
Uses neutral and formal tone
Strength – objective language
An article written in 2010 about current social media use
Weakness – outdated information
Claim based on a personal experience
Weakness – anecdotal evidence
Social media influencer promoting screen time
Weakness – personal interest
Source about online privacy laws
Strength – topic-related
Uses exaggeration to make a point
Weakness – persuasive bias
A research journal reviewed by experts
Strength – peer-reviewed source
Claim supported by a scientific study
Strength – research-backed
Multiple viewpoints included in the source
Strength – balanced argument
Source about climate change in Antarctica
Weakness – not relevant to tech debate
Presents facts without opinion
Strength – factual tone
A celebrity tweet about online learning benefits
Weakness – opinion without expertise
Claim with no supporting evidence
Weakness – unsupported argument
Source only shows one side of the issue
Weakness – lacks balance
Source discussing media influence on youth
Strength
Uses sarcasm to criticise technology
Weakness – subjective language