Evaluation of General Sources

After searching google for some time, I finally found two articles on a debated topic within the science circle: the ethics of genome engineering. Within the topic, there are endless amounts of possibilities that lead to a spectrum of questions. On one hand, there could be many benefits of performing such experiments, a main one being the ability to biologically prevent cancer. Yet, the new findings could also lead to some unhealthy obsessions with changes. Both of the following articles give a neutral view on the subject.

Ynse. "Dna Rendering" via Flickr. October 10, 2007.
Attribution 2.0 Generic License.  

The first article is titled "The Genome Engineering Revolution" and is from a website named TechCrunch.

URL: The url ends in .com, and implies that it is a public website. It is fairly reputable website, and it is the highest read tech website. About 35 million people read their articles monthly.
Author: The authors are Ryan Clarke, a PhD candidate and a published scientist, and James Hyun, PhD student, published scientist and has a background in molecular biology. The authors qualifications are large because they both have been through extensive schooling, and are able to speak correctly on the subject.
Last Updated: The article was last updated May 13, 2015. It is a bit outdated, but the information is still relevant and correct. The links on the page, as well as the videos, still work.
Purpose: The purpose of the article is to inform readers and to give a fair view of both sides of the argument.
Graphics: There are awesome graphics on this website. It has videos that explain the science behind the concept of genome engineering, and the images are spaced out enough that it keeps the text interesting and not boring.
Position on Subject: The article gives a good and fair view of both the dangerous implications of what such a science could potentially do, and also the mass benefits that could be achieved. The information provided can be verified, as the article provides links that bring the reader to reputable peer-reviewed science journals.
Links: The article provides the reader with 20+ links that take the reader to reputable sources, such as science journals, and also help further explain the concepts brought out in the article.

The second article I chose is titled "Smarter humans and smarter machines will work together" and is from a website called Next Big Future.

URL: The url ends in .com and implies that is a public website. It is not as well-known as TechCrunch, but it is still decently reputable and one of the top 50,000 websites in the US. It is less reputable than TechCrunch.
Author: Brian Wang is the author and he is employed at a Health Care company. This website doesn't seem to employ full-time journalists.
Last Updated: The article was last updated on September 3, 2015, making it recent in science time. The page is up-to-date.
Purpose:The purpose of the article is to inform and teach people about the science.
Graphics: The graphics on this website aren't as nice as the ones on TechCrunch. There is one main image used for the whole article and the words are very clumped together.
Position on Subject: The article gives a fair representation of both sides of the argument, and no one would profit from readers who believe the material is true. It is just informative, with a dash of opinion.
Links: There aren't really any links on the website, there is at most 1. It doesn't provide the reader with additional information for verification.