Fooling the whole freshman class at McNeese

[Ron Ecker]

Here’s an interesting item from “Library Exercise: Freshman Orientation 101” at McNeese State University:

EVALUATING WEB SITES:

For items 21-30, determine which web site would be more appropriate as an objective information resource on the subject given.  Select only 1 site (A or for each numbered group.  Record your responses on the answer sheet only.

21. JFK Assassination

        Site A

        Site B

Site A is a link to “Ecker’s JFK Webpage.” Site B is a link to John McAdams’s site.

Is this fair to the students or what? My site says right up front that there was a conspiracy, whereas you can read McAdams’s entire index page and get the impression that his site takes no side on the issue. So unless those freshmen spend a lot of valuable time actually browsing McAdams’s site, which site are they naturally going to find more “objective”?

http://library.mcneese.edu/tutorial/freshorientation.htm

Ron

[Mark Stapleton]

Here’s an interesting item from “Library Exercise: Freshman Orientation 101” at McNeese State University:

EVALUATING WEB SITES:

For items 21-30, determine which web site would be more appropriate as an objective information resource on the subject given.  Select only 1 site (A or for each numbered group.  Record your responses on the answer sheet only.

21. JFK Assassination

        Site A

        Site B

Site A is a link to “Ecker’s JFK Webpage.” Site B is a link to John McAdams’s site.

Is this fair to the students or what? My site says right up front that there was a conspiracy, whereas you can read McAdams’s entire index page and get the impression that his site takes no side on the issue. So unless those freshmen spend a lot of valuable time actually browsing McAdams’s site, which site are they naturally going to find more “objective”?

http://library.mcneese.edu/tutorial/freshorientation.htm

Ron

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Ron,

They're trying to portray your site as a conspiracy site, hence not objective. Of course, as everyone who has studied the assassination knows, it was indeed a conspiracy. Objective analysis of the available evidence shows this to be the case. I'm confident the more astute freshmen will see through this exercise in semantics. If they like your site as much as I do maybe we'll recruit some new assassination researchers.

[James Richards]

You hit the nail on the head, Mark. A conspiracy was behind the murder of JFK so now the objective aspect is how involved said conspiracy was.

James

[Greg Parker]

Ron,

McAdams' level of objectivity can be determined by the language he uses. Try counting for instance, the number of times he (or one of his flunkies) describes a witness as a "crackpot" or similar. But it's not limited to that, either. His language betrays such a total lack of objectivity, your website is a "sure thing" (assuming they actually due browse his site). In fact, yours probably shouldwin that kind of test against many of both the pro and anti conspiracy sites.