DIRECTIONS: Navigate to the first website listed and answer the questions.

Once you have finished this you

will choose your own informational website and answer the same questions. Compare and contrast your answers.
Answer the questions in each section below by typing your response after the question itself in a different color. Give
`evidence to support your answers, i.e. what do you base your conclusions on?

Part 1:
Website Name: The Pacific Northwest Tree Octopus
Website URL: http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/
Website Description: This website gives information and sighting testimonials on the tree octopus.

Bias
Is bias present? Is there biased language? Yes
Whats the intent of the site? To persuade the reader to save the tree octopus.
According to Google advanced search, what sites link to this site and what does that tell you? A lot of pages about
tree octopuses, this tells me that the writer was trying to persuade about an endangered species.
Is the site a personal site and how do you know? Whats the significance if it is or isnt? It s a personal site because
there is a blog.
Author
Whos the author, webmaster, or sponsoring organization and whats their expertise in the field (google the names)?
The author is Lyle Zapato. He received a degree in Psychothermodynamics from Kelvinic University
Is there contact information and, if not, what might that suggest? There is no contact information which suggests he
wanted to remain private and not have anyone engage in a debate with him.
What does the domain extension (.com, .gov, .org, etc.) suggest to you? .net suggests that he created the website on
is own
Accuracy
Does the information come from reliable sources? How do you know? No, he did not cite any references and seemed
to be his personal opinions.
Based on your own knowledge or other sites you found, can you agree with the information found on this site? No,
based on other sites it seems to be a myth.
Is the site free of grammar and spelling errors? How does that impact your assessment of the site? There was no
spelling errors, however, I felt some of his grammar was wrong. It made me trust the information even less.
Is the information on the site up-to-date? How do you know, and what does that suggest to you? The site is not up to
date. It has not been updated since 2012. That indicates that he may have lost interest in the topic.

Readability
What sort of language does this site have (casual, academic, slang)? Casual
Who would you guess is the target audience of this site? People interested in learning about Tree Octopus

Educational Value
Is it easy to navigate the site? Yes, once you put in Tree Octopus it comes up.
Are graphics used to make information more interesting or accessible? Are graphics or advertisements distracting?
The graphics help in making the information more interesting.
Does the site offer multimedia to enhance learning? Yes, there are videos to learn more about the octopus.
In summary, would you use this site? Why or why not? No, I have no interest in learning about tree octopus.
Part 2: Website Assessment: Choose your own informational site to evaluate. Enter the websites information below.

Website Name: The Pocahontas Myth

Website URL: http://www.powhatan.org/pocc.html
Website Description: Gives details to disproof the Pocahontas myth

Bias
Is bias present? Is there biased language? Yes
Whats the intent of the site? To get you to not believe in the myth
According to Google advanced search, what sites link to this site and what does that tell you? theories and
biographies
Is the site a personal site and how do you know? Whats the significance if it is or isnt? The site doesnt give any
proof just speculation.

Author
Whos the author, webmaster, or sponsoring organization and whats their expertise in the field (google the names)?
Is there contact information and, if not, what might that suggest? Does not want to be named.
What does the domain extension (.com, .gov, .org, etc.) suggest to you? A website that was made just for this
reason.

Accuracy
Does the information come from reliable sources? How do you know? No, because the site uses no sources.
Based on your own knowledge or other sites you found, can you agree with the information found on this site? No.
Is the site free of grammar and spelling errors? How does that impact your assessment of the site? Yes, but that
doesnt impact me, because of the fact that it does not have any actual facts.
Is the information on the site up-to-date? How do you know, and what does that suggest to you? NO, because the
authors point of view hasnt changed.

Readability
What sort of language does this site have (casual, academic, slang)? Casual
Who would you guess is the target audience of this site? Those who are on the edge of believeing the Pocahontas
myth.I feel as if both websites were biased because of the use of emotion in each site. Both sites gave no credible
sites, and were linked to not so credible sources either.

Educational Value
Is it easy to navigate the site? No
Are graphics used to make information more interesting or accessible? Are graphics or advertisements distracting?
Advertisements.
Does the site offer multimedia to enhance learning? No.
In summary, would you use this site? Why or why not? Does not interest me with no educational value.

Rationale: Compare and contrast your answers from the first website to the website of your choice. Are both website
credible websites? Explain how you know.