There was a huge difference between the two websites. The first one did not seem to be as credible as the second one. The first also appeared to be bias and have some emotion. It seemed to have a hidden agenda. The second site had all the writers and contributors included and even some past staff members. The second website had contact information. I would use the second website in my research before the first.
| Justfacts.com | Factcheck.org |
| C: Some of the articles had recent dates as early as August 2019. There were a lot of different topics with different information, but, there was no date as to when the information was posted or published. | C: The articles were all dated. There were articles that went all the way back to 2003. |
| R: The information is posed as relevant. It is dependent upon what it is you believe or want to believe politically. It is not intended for everyone to read. | R: The information was relevant. The intended audience would be anyone and did not have a particular subgroup it would target. |
| A: I saw one article that had someone’s name. There just seemed to be different links that led to different information. There was no contact information, no affiliations for the writers or the publishers. The URL doesn’t reveal anything about the source. | A: There was an author for every article. I found a link that displayed the names, and pictures of the staff. They each had a synapse of their credentials and past employers. They all have a journalist background. They had a link for contact information including e-mail and address. |
| A: There were footnotes that cited where the information came from. They seemed to have pulled different articles related to the topic that they were regarding. It did not seem to be without bias. There were no grammar, spelling, or typographical errors. | A: They seemed to have pulled different articles regarding issues from present and previous presidents. They were written without bias and free from emotion. There was also no grammar, spelling, ot typographical errors. |
| P: The purpose of the information is to dissuade anyone that was going against President Trump or the Republican party. It appeared to be geared towards the beliefs and polictics of the Republican party. | P: It appeared that the information is geared towards checking the facts of not only the current, but past presidents as well. There is no hidden agenda and had articles from both Democratic and Republican presidents. |