• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Is a book or magazine a valid source?

Is a book or magazine a valid source?

  • Total voters
    25
ecofarm said:
Ok, that's it, too many Truthers. I'm out.

If you're not, my apologies (I think I recognize the name from CT) but still - good day.
Click to expand...
What are you talking about?
 
radcen said:
Is a book or magazine a valid source?

You say something, someone requests your source for said information, you provide a book or magazine as your source. If a book you might even provide an Amazon or Barnes & Noble link. For a magazine, of course you provide which issue. (It does need to be reasonably obtainable)

Is that a valid source?

I say it is, and eff you if it doesn't satisfy your laziness-inspired desire for a clickable link. You wanted a source and you got one. Get over it. The ball's now in your court.
Click to expand...

In person, yes. In an online debate? No.

In an online debate, when one provides someone with something that is behind a pay wall or without the ability to select a package, it has always struck me as though they're trying to make it so that no one can actually assess the validity of their source.

It just isn't realistic to expect someone to pay money, and then spend a week reading something, for an online forum debate that moves quickly, and everyone knows that. Besides that, unlike in person where you can either hand someone the book or read/copy certain passages to present in the debate, the other person have to actually pay for it, which might be prohibitive for them. Who asks someone to pay 10 bucks to be able to participate in an internet debate? Honestly. What other reason is there to do that besides being squirrely? Unless it's just a "hey, I liked this book, you should check it out"?

I think it's a bit disingenuous to give a tedious and for-pay source in an online debate, and I take it as a rather passive-aggressive gesture, personally.

I'm perfectly willing to use books. I used to use them all the time in debate in high school. But using books online, unless you've got some kind of copy of a passage to post, is just exclusionary.
 
ecofarm said:
Professionals are not paid by the book writer or publisher. By professional reviews, we mean professionals within the field (be that academic or otherwise) that write independent reviews of the work in the course of their profession.



So what? We're talking about people being paid, in the course of their profession, to review material so as to establish validity - not blogs. Actual qualified people putting their career on the line in review of material within their established expertise.

Searching blogs for comments about an article in Vogue is not the same thing. Do you consider youtube comments to be in line with peer review? wtf
Click to expand...

Eco, you seem to making the argument that the only valid source of information is that written as a paper by an academic and reviewed by other equally academics. That is elitist and incorrect. Information published in a magazine, on a blog, or yelled loudly by someone on a street corner is not necessarily incorrect. Data such as this bears further confirmation, but so does so called non biased peer reviewed data produced in a journal. To accept any data as the final word without verifying on your own is a fools game.
 
SmokeAndMirrors said:
In person, yes. In an online debate? No.

In an online debate, when one provides someone with something that is behind a pay wall or without the ability to select a package, it has always struck me as though they're trying to make it so that no one can actually assess the validity of their source.

It just isn't realistic to expect someone to pay money, and then spend a week reading something, for an online forum debate that moves quickly, and everyone knows that. Besides that, unlike in person where you can either hand someone the book or read/copy certain passages to present in the debate, the other person have to actually pay for it, which might be prohibitive for them. Who asks someone to pay 10 bucks to be able to participate in an internet debate? Honestly. What other reason is there to do that besides being squirrely? Unless it's just a "hey, I liked this book, you should check it out"?

I think it's a bit disingenuous to give a tedious and for-pay source in an online debate, and I take it as a rather passive-aggressive gesture, personally.

I'm perfectly willing to use books. I used to use them all the time in debate in high school. But using books online, unless you've got some kind of copy of a passage to post, is just exclusionary.
Click to expand...
Fair point, and in the interest of full disclosure, I would never purposely cite a book in an attempt otherwise conceal my information. If I am aware of an online link, I will provide it. (And I will provide a quote if I only have the book, if I can.) But, at the same time, that are indeed times where I got my information from a printed source and I am unaware of any online links. Just because it comes from a book/magazine doesn't automatically make it illegitimate.
 
radcen said:
Fair point, and in the interest of full disclosure, I would never purposely cite a book in an attempt otherwise conceal my information. If I am aware of an online link, I will provide it. (And I will provide a quote, if I can.) But, at the same time, that are indeed times where I got my information from a printed source and I am unaware of any online links. Just because it comes from a book/magazine doesn't automatically make it illegitimate.
Click to expand...

Just from googling the subject, it appears that universities do indeed still accept magazine, newspaper, and other sources as supporting information for research and other papers. I'm sure it depends on what the subject matter is, and how technical and/or scholarly it needs to be, but from what I remember when I was in school (early 80's), we used a pretty wide variety of source material.
 
lizzie said:
Just from googling the subject, it appears that universities do indeed still accept magazine, newspaper, and other sources as supporting information for research and other papers. I'm sure it depends on what the subject matter is, and how technical and/or scholarly it needs to be, but from what I remember when I was in school (early 80's), we used a pretty wide variety of source material.
Click to expand...

technically you can still write separate works and cite them as unpublished sources and be fine academically as long as you make them available for the professor. It is iffy practice to me, but still considered legitimate scholarship to cite yourself.
 
ecofarm said:
Wrong.

I'm one of the people that does not accept a source that is void of outside critical analysis (such as magazine articles). I'm sure my discernment of sources is superior to yours, given my education dwarfs yours. One shouldn't get personal about things they're ignorant regarding.

It all falls into place. You're one of those people that thinks he can critically analyze another's work all by himself. You know, one of those people that doesn't understand the purpose of outside review, let alone peer review. You think you know it all and you don't need reviews of material to determine accuracy. And guess what? That's stupid.
Click to expand...
Your standards are not just high, they are needlessly pretentious. At the very least, magazine articles contain interviews, reports and anecdotes that can used as evidence to support arguments about the nature and effects of people, organizations and events. In truth, however, such articles can also be used to find first person narratives, statistics and other sources of information. And, with magazine articles, you can still evaluate the credibility just like you would any other source - you're just missing one measure of credibility - outside review. Maybe missing that measure weakens credibility to an extent, but it doesn't eliminate the source as credible completely.

You're operating on the pretentious plane of dissertations and academic journals in the "hard sciences". That's not what we're talking about here.
 
EMNofSeattle said:
What are you talking about?
Click to expand...

Ecofarm has a very narrow view of "acceptable source" and think those of us who argue otherwise are somehow "truthers" (not sure what is meant by that) who lie about getting our degrees.

I advise not engaging him/her on this topic anymore. Sounds like he/she may be gone from the thread anyway.

(Of course Ecofarm is entitled to his/her beliefs - only peer-reviewed books should be used as sources - but not to the fact others of us have stated: i.e. yes, we used magazine articles as sources while in college.)
 
ecofarm said:
Not really. Some source mediums are simply not acceptable, no matter who they claim wrote the article, like magazines.
Click to expand...

The issue is "popular" vs scholarly resources. At DP we mainly rely on "popular" sources such as WaPo--sources available to the general public. Sometimes experts do give interviews and provide information to ordinary folks, and so it's not just the medium; it's also the source of the information. A quote is a quote.

And then there are trade publications, which are regarded generally as "popular" as opposed to scholarly. I regard them as "bridge" publications because scholarly experts do publish in these, e.g. state co-op publications published by their extension services that are mailed free of charge to rural residents. The one I receive monthly does contain articles published by experts in the field, and so I would count this as a scholarly source.

Much depends on the industry. Google "industrial distribution journals," and see what you hit. But there are venerable and respected magazines--trade pubs--which do contain scholarly information. The best example is HR Magazine. I wouldn't hesitate to cite it in a bibliography for publication.
 
Declan said:
You have a very antiquated view of "Today". With Amazon and others' print on demand services, most anybody can write a book and have it published. That it has a lot of words and can sit on a shelf has nothing to do with the quality of the content.
Click to expand...

True. I know people who publish on Amazon (and make tidy little livings doing so, BTW). A current DP member has talked about his spouse's publications too. This is the electronic morphing of the vanity press.
 
As for a book, I think it is fine so long as it contains footnote resources that support author claims/suppositions. I'm a bit iffy about magazine articles. Depends on the author's reputation and/or credentials.
 
ecofarm said:
Ok, that's it, too many Truthers. I'm out.
Click to expand...

I'm glad if you are because in all my time at DP, I've never read such misinformation, and most of it came from you. To another you posted, "I'm sure my discernment of sources is superior to yours, given my education dwarfs yours. One shouldn't get personal about things they're ignorant regarding."

Take your own advice, Eco. You are mistaken about so very much, and your own understanding is limited. Among your mistaken claims are that there are no critiques of magazine articles, books have to be peer-reviewed by at least 20 people with a doctoral degree, an academic journal is not a magazine (no, it’s an academic magazine that distinguishes itself by the term “journal,” but it is a periodical just the same), blogs and magazines aren't cited in scholarly publications, and etc.

I wouldn't be saying this if your tone throughout this thread hadn't been so arrogant and superior, but "we in academia" includes you, unless you've finished, only as a provisional member. Wait until you yourself have served on a doctoral committee and until your experience with peer review isn't so limited--when you're doing a lot of it yourself, I mean--and until you yourself are trained in bibliographic analysis to puff yourself up in this way.
 
Simpleχity;1064012317 said:
As for a book, I think it is fine so long as it contains footnote resources that support author claims/suppositions. I'm a bit iffy about magazine articles. Depends on the author's reputation and/or credentials.
Click to expand...

Of course both CAN be acceptable.
The American Journal of Medecine is a perfectly acceptable source of information.
Dr Ho`s semi-monthly journal of Dr Ho`s medicinal herbal remedies published, edited and reviewd by Dr and Mrs. Ho, not so much.

When discussing say the origins of the 2nd world war Mein Kampf could be used.
However it would be silly to try and use it as a source if writing an anthropologiocal paper on jews in 1920`s Austria.
 
When I read the post about blogs, I immediately thought of Powerline , Little Green Footballs and "Memogate" (also known as "Rathergate"). Go to Google Scholar, type in "powerline blog and memogate," and see what you hit.
 
radcen said:
Is a book or magazine a valid source?

You say something, someone requests your source for said information, you provide a book or magazine as your source. If a book you might even provide an Amazon or Barnes & Noble link. For a magazine, of course you provide which issue. (It does need to be reasonably obtainable)

Is that a valid source?

I say it is, and eff you if it doesn't satisfy your laziness-inspired desire for a clickable link. You wanted a source and you got one. Get over it. The ball's now in your court.
Click to expand...

It depends on the reference.

Just because it is a book it does not automatically mean that the content is valid and reliable. I was issued a book that had such nonsense depicted in it that I had to throw it across the office and into the can.

A magazine may be a journal, as in a scientific journal. It then may depend on what is searched for.
 
radcen said:
Is a book or magazine a valid source?

You say something, someone requests your source for said information, you provide a book or magazine as your source. If a book you might even provide an Amazon or Barnes & Noble link. For a magazine, of course you provide which issue. (It does need to be reasonably obtainable)

Is that a valid source?

I say it is, and eff you if it doesn't satisfy your laziness-inspired desire for a clickable link. You wanted a source and you got one. Get over it. The ball's now in your court.
Click to expand...

The problem is that books or magazines aren't conducive to online debates and trust is abused on a regular basis on DP, where sources are frequently taken out of context, misinterpreted or misstated altogether. If I were to accept a book or magazine, it would either have to come from someone I already trusted to be honest, or a really sizable chunk of the original text would have to be retyped here so I could be assured that nothing was cherry picked.
 
PDFs work just fine, and more and more articles are being DOI'd and PDF'd.
 
nota bene said:
Among your mistaken claims are that there are no critiques of magazine articles,
Click to expand...

I didn't claim that. I claimed there are no professional reviews - and there are not. Why? Because only a moron would think professionally reviewing a magazine is worth a bucket of piss.

books have to be peer-reviewed by at least 20 people with a doctoral degree,
Click to expand...

Lie. I claimed no such thing.

an academic journal is not a magazine (no, it’s an academic magazine that distinguishes itself by the term “journal,” but it is a periodical just the same),
Click to expand...

This is too stupid to respond to. You obviously have no clue what you're babbling about.

blogs and magazines aren't cited in scholarly publications, and etc.
Click to expand...

No college, even a garbage community college, allows the citation of blogs and magazines. You are again showing a pitiful lack of education and understanding of the purpose of peer review.

You're claiming an academic journal article is the same as a blog. That's so idiotic I can't believe you're serious.
 
Last edited:
nota bene said:
The issue is "popular" vs scholarly resources. At DP we mainly rely on "popular" sources such as WaPo--sources available to the general public. Sometimes experts do give interviews and provide information to ordinary folks, and so it's not just the medium; it's also the source of the information. A quote is a quote.

And then there are trade publications, which are regarded generally as "popular" as opposed to scholarly. I regard them as "bridge" publications because scholarly experts do publish in these, e.g. state co-op publications published by their extension services that are mailed free of charge to rural residents. The one I receive monthly does contain articles published by experts in the field, and so I would count this as a scholarly source.

Much depends on the industry. Google "industrial distribution journals," and see what you hit. But there are venerable and respected magazines--trade pubs--which do contain scholarly information. The best example is HR Magazine. I wouldn't hesitate to cite it in a bibliography for publication.
Click to expand...

Everyone knows this.

Yet, you cannot discern the difference between a blog and an academic journal article. That's pathetic.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Depending on the author, a book is acceptable. Magazine, no.

Of course, for sports information and non-controversial stuff, just about anything is acceptable (and debatable) as long as the source is not known garbage.
Click to expand...

Disagree. I've quoted back issues of National Geographic and The Walrus that weren't available online.
 
Grand Mal said:
Disagree. I've quoted back issues of National Geographic and The Walrus that weren't available online.
Click to expand...

Any decent professor would require you seek the source material for the NG article. It's not like that's secret and the reviewed material will be without the embellishments, under-substantiated conclusions and personal wanderings.

Why were you incapable of finding the source journal articles? That's lazy half-ass scholarship.
 
ecofarm said:
Any decent professor would require you seek the source material for the NG article. It's not like that's secret and the reviewed material will be without the embellishments, under-substantiated conclusions and personal wanderings.

Why were you incapable of finding the source journal articles? That's lazy half-ass scholarship.
Click to expand...

No scholarship involved. It was just on-line discussion.
I can understand why someone would be unwilling to accept such a citation and if they do I guess the discussion's over. For sure "I read somewhere that..." can't decide an argument but as an example of something it's acceptable. I do it all the time so it must be okay.
 
Grand Mal said:
No scholarship involved. It was just on-line discussion.
I can understand why someone would be unwilling to accept such a citation and if they do I guess the discussion's over. For sure "I read somewhere that..." can't decide an argument but as an example of something it's acceptable. I do it all the time so it must be okay.
Click to expand...

In casual conversation, any source might be acceptable.

One can still understand the difference between professionally reviewed sources and blogs/magazines, and understand the importance of professional review. For someone to believe their own personal investigation is sufficient to vet a piece of work regarding which that are not a trained professional is beyond stupid.

"All periodicals are equal" is ignorant beyond belief.
 
ecofarm said:
Everyone knows this.

Yet, you cannot discern the difference between a blog and an academic journal article. That's pathetic.
Click to expand...

No, what's sad is that you don't understand what a periodical is when you're this far into the academic pipeline. What I said and you bolded was "it is a periodical just the same." That it is, Eco. Embarrassing for you that you don't know what a "periodical" is.

Further, in the matter of peer review, there is more than one kind. "Popular" periodicals such as WaPo use editors and fact-checkers; scholarly journals use referees. You are mistaken that the latter are always paid; some disciplines are so small that the reviewing is on a volunteer basis (Czech literature), and some are so small that everybody knows who the "blind" reviewers are (cognitive psych).

Now stop playing the smarter-and-better-educated-than-thou card. You and your hubris have been caught short. I know perfectly well, as most of us, the difference between a blog and a scholarly journal, and what I said was that I wouldn't hesitate to cite a reliable blog. You are willfully misrepresenting what I said.

If you don't believe that you said magazine articles aren't critiqued, take a look at your own Post #9. If you don't believe that undergraduate college papers cite "popular" sources, take a look at the Purdue OWL's sample bib: https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/12/
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom