Evaluation of General Sources

While browsing for controversies in Neuroscience, I surprisingly found very little from 2014-2015. Scientific fields are generally easy to find controversy in, considering the common questioning of the morality of certain research, such as studying the brains of animals who can not consent to the research being done on them. However, in terms of controversial "events" that occurred within the last year, the Neuroscience field has been relatively quiet, except for the debate on mind control, following the recent scientific breakthrough in being able to control the minds of mice.

Maus, Jens, "PET scan of the human brain" 2010, public domain

"Mouse Mind Control for a Good Cause?":
URL: While the URL ends with .com, DW is known as a generally credible site for updates and news on breakthroughs, which indicates credibility for the source.
Author: The author is Gabriel Borrud, who is an interviewer for DW. Borrud has several other platforms that he can be found on, and the DW Facebook page has a snippet introducing Borrud and his credibility as an author/interviewer.
Last Updated: While the site does not tell you when the article was updated, it does mention the date it was published, which was the recent date of July 31st, 2015. Links on the page lead you to sources for the topic at hand, such as the research paper on the mind control that was published.
Purpose: The purpose of this article seems to be to ask questions about the research, but also to question what controversies may arise from the research. Nothing appears promoted.
Graphics: There is a picture of mice with implants attached to their heads, which adds to the controversy of the morality of the research.
Position: The only position truly taken is that problems will arise from others who disagree with this research and how mind control will affect our future.
Links: Links are found to the sources and on the sidebar regarding other interesting and recent news articles.


"Mouse Mind Control":
URL: This is a .com URL, but it is also "the-scientist", so of course the name of the site gives its own level of credibility.
Author: The Author is Jef Akst, who is hard to find elsewhere but writes other seemingly credible articles for the-scientist.
Last Updated: The article was created May 4th, 2015, but there is no insight into when or if it was edited after that date. However, it is a recent date, so the article does not seem outdated.
Purpose: The purpose seems purely informational. There are more facts than opinions in this article, by far.
Graphics: The only picture is very scientific, showing neuroactivity in the brain. This again emphasizes the lack of position in this article, and shows the information from a solely scientific standpoint.
Position: As stated above, there is no clear position taken on the subject matter or the controversy. The article does seem to focus on the good things that can come from this discovery, however.
Links: There are links to tags, popular/related articles, and promotional ads on this site, which shows that the source wants you to dig further into the subject.