Annotated Bibliography

Example Source:

Powell, Betsy. “Toronto Won’t Bid for 2024 Olympics.” The Toronto Star, February 18, 2014.

Accessed February 20, 2014. http://www.thestar.com/news/city_hall/2014/01/20/toronto_

wont_bid_for_2024_olympics .html
Summary:

In her article Powell explains that Toronto has decided not to bid for the 2024 Olympics largely
because the idea was not well supported and the chances of winning were slim. She goes on to
explain that the city is still debating whether or not to bid for the 2025 world’s fair, an idea
which seems to have more supporters. Various arguments for and against hosting the world’s
fair are outlined including the Harper Government’s perspective and the opinions of various
city officials.
Critical Analysis:
Whose voices are heard in this source?

Mayor Rob Ford is quoted as are several MP’s and city councillors.

Whose voices are absent from this source?

This source only cites the official opinions of city officials so the voices of average Torontonians
are missing. Specifically this article is lacking the opinions of people like business owners and
those who live around the venues that would be used (people who would be directly
impacted).

Is this source biased? Why or why not?

This source seems to be biased against the bid. I feel this way because Powell repeatedly
mentions the various costs associated with these bids but never mentions potential income.
She also gives lots of attention to the opinions of those who disagree with the bid (giving
detailed quotes about why it is a bad idea), while those who do agree are never quoted, except
to say that they would support it. The one time positives are mentioned the group bringing
them forward are referred to only as expo boosters, a vague statement that makes it unclear
who exactly is supporting it.
Source #1: Tang, Justin. “Thomas Gunton: Trans Mountain Pipeline Is Not Needed.” Vancouver
Sun, April 17, 2018. https://vancouversun.com/opinion/op-ed/thomas-gunton-trans-mountain-
pipeline-is-not-needed.
Summary: In this article it explains why the Trans Mountain Pipeline is not needed. Thomas
Gunton uses good evidence to explain why there is no use for the Trans Mountain Pipeline. A
 example is the Trans Mountain Pipeline “has a much higher risk factor than the other projects
because it cuts through the middle of Canada’s third-largest metropolis and requires tankers
that will put B.C.’s coast at risk. The risk of a port spill is 77 per cent, and the median risk of a
tanker spill is 56 per cent” (Gunton). He explains what he thinks then he proves it with facts
and static’s.
Critical Analysis:
Whose voices are heard in this source? Whose voices are absent from this source? Is this
source biased? Why or why not?

He is speaking for the environment. The voices that are absent from the source is the people
who are for the pipeline and think it would benefit them. This source is biased because it only
gives one side of the issue.
Source #2: “Who We Are.” Who We Are - Trans Mountain. Accessed November 10, 2019.
https://www.transmountain.com/who-we-are.

Summary: This article explains why the pipeline would be good. It shows how long the pipeline
would be and what the purpose of the pipeline would be. The Article shows facts about how it
would positively help and what it would do.
Critical Analysis:
Whose voices are heard in this source? Whose voices are absent from this source? Is this
source biased? Why or why not?

The voice that is heard is the voice of the people that are making the Trans Mountain Pipeline.
The Voices that are absent from the article are the people that are being affected. It is biased
because it only looks at one side of the project.
Source #3: Canada, Service. “Government of Canada.” Canada.ca. Government of Canada, October
15, 2019. https://www.canada.ca/en/campaign/trans-mountain.html.
Summary: In this article it explains about what the project will be like. It is showing the facts
and where it would go from.
Critical Analysis:
Whose voices are heard in this source? Whose voices are absent from this source? Is this
source biased? Why or why not?

The Government of Canada is heard. The voices that are absent is the people who are making
the pipeline and the people who are against the pipeline. This source is Biased because it only
gives the facts and it is not leaning to one side or the other.

Additional Sources:

Cite any other sources you used here using either Chicago or APA style (a citation guide is
included in this folder).
“'I Wanna Own This Thing': Meet the Indigenous Groups Trying to Buy the Trans Mountain
Pipeline | CBC News.” CBCnews. CBC/Radio Canada, October 5, 2019.
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/trans-mountain-pipeline-first-nations-purchase-1.5279387.

“Why We Need Pipelines.” About Pipelines. Accessed November 10, 2019.

https://www.aboutpipelines.com/en/pipelines-in-our-lives/why-we-need-pipelines/

MacKay, Graeme. “Oil – Page 2.” mackaycartoons, November 30, 2016.

https://mackaycartoons.net/tag/oil/page/2/.

Staff. “First Nation and Environmental Groups Seek Leave to Appeal Trans Mountain Pipeline
Ruling.” Global News. Global News, November 5, 2019.
https://globalnews.ca/news/6131680/tmx-pipeline-ruling-leave-first-nation-environment/.

Valentine , Harry. “Alternatives to Canada's Trans Mountain Pipeline.” The Maritime Executive,
September 1, 2018. https://www.maritime-executive.com/editorials/alternatives-to-canada-s-
trans-mountain-pipeline.