Credible Sources

Marquita Johnson
September 30, 2008
Reaction Paper #2


Minimum wage by Webster’s definition is “the lowest wage paid or permitted to be paid ; specifically : a wage fixed by legal authority or by contract as the least that may be paid either to employed persons generally or to a particular category of employed persons.” There is a similar term associates with minimum wage known as the living wage. This term is best defined by Webster as “a wage sufficient to provide the necessities and comforts essential to an acceptable standard of living.” When conducting research for these types of wages, availability of research was not an issue, but wondering if these findings are legitimate is the important factor. In research, one should consider the validity and credibility of their sources. If you have a strong credible source, it will aid in the support of your arguement. A news article from CNN, The Economist, and JSTOR (short for journal storage), all explains the subject of the minimum wage. Then there is wikipedia, which by definition is a web-based encyclopedia that has all of its information contributed by anonymous people worldwide. All four of these venues provide information and are well known. But if a student were trying to research a subject such as minimum wage, how credible would these sources be?
A news article from CNN entitled “Minimum-wage workers live on the edge” goes in detail about how minimum wage is not a means to a comfortable living. In the article a 21 year old man, is having regrets of living on his own after receiving his paycheck from a minimum wage job. This article goes to show that living off a minimum wage salary is very difficult and stressed. CNN is a reliable source to obtain this information from because of its credibility. It’s a news organization that has real life stories with real life situations.
An article from a trade publication known as The Economist, talks about both McCain and Obama’s standpoint on the economy and their solutions to improve it. It goes on to say that both candidates’ solutions are unrealistic, and need to consider a more practical approach. This article goes to show that the government says, raising the minimum wage will only harm the economy, in reality how much of a negative effect would it really have in the long run? In comparison to CNN, The Economist publishes actual real life events, and has a notable reputation nationwide.
A scholarly journal known as JSTOR takes the minimum wage and turns it into what is known as the living wage. This report gives effective solutions in raising the wage. It also states the positive and long term effect of having a wage that’s sustainable for the less fortunate and unprivileged. JSTOR has writers producing literary works based off an educated opinion. Meaning, these writers have background knowledge and experience of the topics they write. They take into consideration the opposing views as well.
Last but certainly not least is wikipedia. It not only gives a great detailed definition of minimum wage, but it also gives more facts about minimum wage as well. Wikipedia talks about the wage from state to state, the economics of it and the debate over raising it. I decided to add my viewpoints on this topic into the wiki as well. I purposely made a brief bias opinion about why the minimum wage should be raised. A few days later I went back to check the site, and it had been deleted.
All of these sources including wikipedia are convincing when it comes to finding information. But what sets all the sources apart for wikipedia is how the information is compiled. Wikipedia allows everyone to contribute to providing information about minimum wage. Someone who has no idea or may have a personal bias against raising or lowering minimum wage could easily put information onto this website. Although there is a monitor who checks the validity, whose to say how long false information is exposed before getting deleted. The other three sources have credible people providing information. The writer’s most likely have written before, obtain a level of higher education and experience, and had to go through many approvals and criticism before their work was published. I would not consider wikipedia a reliable source for research because its authors are any and everybody. I would however consider wikipedia a gateway for other reliable sources. I wouldn’t cross it out completely.

.