• 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
jimbo said:
And what would a "we in academia" consider a reliable source? A peer reviewed paper in a journal as opposed to an article written by one of the highest regarded experts in my field published in a magazine?
Click to expand...

No college allows magazine citations. It doesn't matter who writes it. Go to their reviewed material and cite that.

The reason someone esteemed and academically published would write in a magazine is because such a format permits under-substantiated speculation.

So, use their reviewed material.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
Not really. Some source mediums are simply not acceptable, no matter who they claim wrote the article, like magazines.

Note my edit above.
Click to expand...

And yet the Congressional research service often uses newspaper and magazine articles as their primary sources and magazine articles from something like The Economist are far more credible than some jacklegged populist diatribe that happens to have a bind. Context is everything and many people who write them fancy books also write magazine articles and also write blogs. There is no credibility gap because of the medium any more.
 
Some college students have done their Master's Thesis on Gilligan's Island. Should they preclude interviews and quotes of the creators and/or actors if they happened to come from an entertainment magazine?
 
Declan said:
There is no credibility gap because of the medium any more.
Click to expand...

Yes, there's no difference between reviewed and not-reviewed material.

:screwy

Do you understand the purpose of reviews? It's to establish credibility.
 
radcen said:
Some college students have done their Master's Thesis on Gilligan's Island. Should they preclude interviews and quotes of the creators and/or actors if they happened to come from an entertainment magazine?
Click to expand...


I agree. There are many technology issues that are so recent they are ONLY written about in magazines; no one has done a book on them yet. Should the student just not write about that issue?

Maybe Ecofarm only studied 1500 BC history or something...
 
radcen said:
Some college students have done their Master's Thesis on Gilligan's Island. Should they preclude interviews and quotes of the creators and/or actors if they happened to come from an entertainment magazine?
Click to expand...

How is an actor's opinion materially relevant?
 
paddymcdougall said:
rofl!
Click to expand...

Yeah, laugh real hard. He made that up. I claimed no such thing. I have no problem with material not available online.

He confused "material with reviews" and "material online". I know, that's ridiculous, but it's what he did.
 
ecofarm said:
Yes, there's no difference between reviewed and not-reviewed material.

:screwy

Do you understand the purpose of reviews? It's to establish credibility.
Click to expand...

I understand that people get paid very well to have their name appear in association with somebody else's book. Some of those folks make thousands of dollars just lending their credibility to the dust jacket. Those glowing reviews do not happen for free.

Still depends on the context.
 
paddymcdougall said:
I agree. There are many technology issues that are so recent they are ONLY written about in magazines; no one has done a book on them yet. Should the student just not write about that issue?
Click to expand...

Idiocy. Where do you think the material from magazine come from? No one does research and publishes it in a magazine first. They might publish in a magazine after a journal, so that they have leeway in making under-substantiated conclusions and personal remarks.

Maybe Ecofarm only studied 1500 BC history or something...
Click to expand...

It doesn't appear you ever studied, except perhaps Gilligan's Island.


Declan said:
I understand that people get paid very well to have their name appear in association with somebody else's book. Some of those folks make thousands of dollars just lending their credibility to the dust jacket.
Click to expand...

Who cares? Books are professionally reviewed.
 
ecofarm said:
No college allows magazine citations. It doesn't matter who writes it. Go to their reviewed material and cite that.

The reason someone esteemed and academically published would write in a magazine is because such a format permits under-substantiated speculation.

So, use their reviewed material.
Click to expand...

It doesn't matter to me what a college permits. I'm not writing a thesis. It matters what I have researched on my own and found to be substiantiated. Will I listen to an acedemic or read their paper or article? Sure. Will I accept it on its face? Probably not. I will still cross confirm. I'll also listen to other sources that have something to say. I cross source those also.
 
jimbo said:
It matters what I have researched on my own and found to be substiantiated.
Click to expand...

Are you a Truther?

Any critical thinker knows better than to trust their own limited knowledge in establishing the credibility of work. You don't think just maybe something might slide past you? What are you, omniscient?
 
jimbo said:
It doesn't matter to me what a college permits. I'm not writing a thesis. It matters what I have researched on my own and found to be substiantiated. Will I listen to an acedemic or read their paper or article? Sure. Will I accept it on its face? Probably not. I will still cross confirm. I'll also listen to other sources that have something to say. I cross source those also.
Click to expand...
Would also depend on the subject. If we're debating a political subject here on DP, for example, sure there might be some facts like place and time, but the conclusions are still subjective opinion.
 
lizzie said:
How in the hell did we ever know anything was true, back in the day? :lol:
Click to expand...

The same way we do today, by professional reviews. Not, as Truthers would tell you, by figuring it all out and knowing everything about everything all by yourself - because, you know what, that's not ****ing possible.
 
radcen said:
Would also depend on the subject. If we're debating a political subject here on DP, for example, sure there might be some facts like place and time, but the conclusions are still subjective opinion.
Click to expand...

That is the rub of it. I find more interesting facts in the things that I disagree with than the things I agree with. Doesn't change my bias on an issue. Facts can be be argued a lot of different ways.
 
ecofarm said:
The same way we do today, by professional review. Not, as Truthers would tell you, by figuring it all out and knowing everything about everything all by yourself - because, you know what, that's not ****ing possible.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...

It doesn't matter who writes it. If a book is of any consequence, it will have professional reviews. Those reviews might completely discredit the book, the important thing is that professional reviews exist for books and they do not for magazine articles.
 
Last edited:
ecofarm said:
It doesn't matter who writes it. If the book is of any consequence, it will have professional reviews. Those reviews might completely discredit the book, the important thing is that professional reviews exist for books and they do not for magazine articles.
Click to expand...

You still ignore that "professional reviews" are paid reviews and that magazine articles get widely circulated in the internet and receive lots of commentary, positive and negative by professionals and lay folks alike.
 
radcen said:
Would also depend on the subject. If we're debating a political subject here on DP, for example, sure there might be some facts like place and time, but the conclusions are still subjective opinion.
Click to expand...

You, sir, are correct. Most subjects are subject to opinion, even those acedemics would have you believe are settled and not subject to debate.
 
Declan said:
You still ignore that "professional reviews" are paid reviews
Click to expand...

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.

magazine articles get widely circulated in the internet and receive lots of commentary, positive and negative by professionals and lay folks alike.
Click to expand...

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
 
Last edited:
Declan said:
You still ignore that "professional reviews" are paid reviews and that magazine articles get widely circulated in the internet and receive lots of commentary, positive and negative by professionals and lay folks alike.
Click to expand...
Not to mention that many of the people who write books also write magazine articles, and visa versa. Sometimes even with some of the same information.
 
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 sources used for a book or magazine,which many magazines and books will cite. It would probably also depend on the author too.For example a book or article about guns by Michael Bloomberg then the article or book has about as much credibility as a article Alex Jones regarding Obama's birth.
 
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...
I disagree many magazines are actually very respectable sources. It also depends what your sourcing the magazine for, for example if you're making the assertion that Charlton Heston said XYZ pointing to the appropriate issue of American rifleman would definitely be a reliable source. I myself have learned a lot about gardening and small livestock by reading mother Earth news for example. Many magazines are also publications catering to a certain audience that contain a lot of great material so I wouldn't discount magazines offhand
 
EMNofSeattle said:
I disagree many magazines are actually very respectable sources. It also depends what your sourcing the magazine for, for example if you're making the assertion that Charlton Heston said XYZ pointing to the appropriate issue of American rifleman would definitely be a reliable source. I myself have learned a lot about gardening and small livestock by reading mother Earth news for example. Many magazines are also publications catering to a certain audience that contain a lot of great material so I wouldn't discount magazines offhand
Click to expand...

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.
 
Last edited:
Example: Radley Balko's book, Rise of the Warrior Cop

The man is a well-regarded writer and commentator of this particular issue. His book has been well-received and well-reviewed, overall.

Mr Balko has also written similar pieces, quoting his own book, in HuffPost and various magazine articles. All of his writings cite sources, though the book obviously has more room to be more comprehensive in citing sources. Regardless, the information is the same and is from the same sources.

What would make his book any more credible than his internet and/or magazine articles? They're all essentially the same thing, only different format.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom