http://zapatopi.net/treeoctopus/
http://weeklyworldnews.com/
http://www.theonion.com/
There is one thing I have learned when doing research on topics of my interest. You have to read a lot, and a lot of it of low quality to be able to recognize the validity of the information. The first website was created to make the public aware of a particular species in danger of extinction. Is it true? Looking at the way the information is conveyed, I would decide that this is a legit website with valid information. It’s very “decorated” but I have to say that the graphic of a website doesn’t influence – or I am not aware of it- my trust. If it doesn’t ask directly for the money, I tend to give it a benefit of a doubt but I will always look for confirmation of the information if I plan to take any action. The other two websites are news providers. News is a highly personal choice, because if it wasn’t the case, we would only need one newspaper and one website that would provide it. After all, most information does repeat itself throughout the media. What varies is the way of presenting and interpreting it. Just looking at the websites and reading through the information, it is in my opinion, impossible to validate its content. That is why any research requires reading multitude of materials, comparing and drawing own conclusions.