1. What elements of news do you see in each video?

2. Prior to watching each video, did you have any feelings of bias towards the source? If so, did the video affirm or deny those feelings?

3. Do you think this source should be trusted for news? Why or why not?

   Repeat for each of the 3 shows.

1. oddity, impact, immediacy

2. I don't know who this source is, but I assume it's a TV entertainment show.

3. I don't believe it should be 100% trusted as a source simply because of the show's nature. The show seems to be based more on entertainment and comedy than being informational.

1. Elements of news:

   Oddity

   Impact

   Immediacy

2. No prior feelings because I didn’t know steaven

3. It is current information but, the main goal of the clip was entertainment so if you actually wanted 100% accurate information I would encourage people to read an article or watch the actual news

1. timeliness, impact, oddity

2. no

3. no, just because it seems more like a comedy than news and he didn't seem sure on the facts he was sharing.

1. Timeliness, impact, oddity

2. I felt biased against, and though this source wasn't biased itself, I don't like him as a person.

3. I think this could be a source for some basic information, but I have a feeling that for more complicated issues he would be pretty biased.

1. timeliness, it is very recent news

2. no i did not

3. yes it can be because he used other sources for what he was saying

video 2

1. oddity, it is a very weird even that happened

2. i dont like CNN

3. i do think it is a good source of information but they have interesting takes on things

video 3

1. proximity, this even is close to me only one state over

2. im not biased

3. this is a good spot to get news from because it was done by the news company

1. oddity, currency

2. no prior feelings

3. not the most trustworthy news source because while yes he’s talking about relevant topics, he may not be credible and could have bias, is simply just a talk show host

1. elements

   • impact

   • timeliness

   • oddity

   • audience

2. bias

   none I can think of.

3. is it a trusted source

no, he isn't speaking on anything he is experienced about in any way, and the things he is reporting on seem to be for comedic affect, not education.

I think the one element that can be seen here is Celebrity and prominence. Although I didn't have any prior feelings about Colbert and his show, there is a reason it is a show and just knowing they will do anything for content to make their viewers happy makes you question the trust worthiness. Which in this case I'd argue it isn't trust worthy just by looking at the purpose- rather to inform viewers its to make them laugh and give them a show.

1. Immediacy, impact

2. I didn’t feel any complete biased even though CNN is more left, but airplane mishaps does not relate to my political stance.

3. This source is very useful and trust worthy. They quoted the airline themselves and provide details not the average person would know about the situation

1. elements: rarity, currency, impact

2. no bias

3. yes, I'd argue it is a trusted source, due to their purpose in educating their views rather than just trying to entertain them, nor did they show any bias towards the airline company or passengers

1. impact, timeliness

2. although CNN tends to lean more left, this was not a very biased situation

3. yes they are trustworthy, they are an actual news source and had useful information to give viewers

1. Timeliness, oddity, impact, proximity (the economics have an impact across the country)

2. I've heard that it leans left; she definitely had opinions on the larger repercussions, but there was nothing that seemed extreme.

3. I think it could be with the knowledge that it is probably biased; I would say that for any news source that leans one way or the other but this story seems to be fine.

1. immediacy, human interest, impact

2. I know that CNN is a more left-leaning new source. This video is not political so the source's biases were not revealed as much.

3. I think this source can be trusted for news given the reader understands its biases.

1. elements

   • impact

   • timeliness

   • oddity

   • audience

   • emotion

2. bias

   bias against to some extent, because they are a well-known left news source.

3. is it a trusted source

yes, they spoke in a way to educate and did research into the issue. they also had intel from the companies involved, and a lot more evidence to support their points.

1. timeliness, oddity, impact,

2. not really, but I know it more left leaning

3. yes, the facts were solid and confirmed from other sources. This was a pretty clear story with little controversy so she has good facts, but on more controversial topics/political stories this source is bias.

1. proximity, impact

2. no bias

3. trustworthy source because it has relevant local news

1. impact, proximity, human interest and emotion (due to it being a local station causes more impact to us)

2. no bias

3. yes it is reliable, due to it being close to home and really not showing any bias rather just informing their viewers

1. elements

   • impact

   • timeliness

   • audience

   • proximity

   • emotion

   • human interest

2. bias

   biased towards because they are a fairly local source.

3. is it a trusted source

yes, again its informational, and they talked to people on the scene about what happened.

1. Proximity, impact, human interest, currency, timeliness

2. not really; watched this source before

3. I would say so; there wasn't biasy in this story and the information seemed accurate

1. Proximity, human interest, immediacy, impact

2. No biased opinion for this source

3. This source is very trustworthy because they had live interviews with officers that were at the scene and parents whose kids got hurt in the shooting

1. timeliness, proximity, impact, human interest

2. I don't have any biases and am not aware of any Channel 8 may have.

3. From what I know, I believe this source can be trusted for news, especially for local issues. This source was very straightforward and "to the facts".

1. impact, timeliness, human interest, conflict,

2. no

3. I think this source is trustworthy due to it being local news, and they also showed footage of people close to the incident.

1 oddity seen within the report may be an impact

2 I had prior knowledge of the topic I have a bias against talk shows for news

3 I think this is a good source for basic news I wouldn't use it for anything that could be influenced by large bias

video 2

1 oddity, impact

2 no prior feelings seem trustworthy for the story

3 I think CNN is a relatively trustworthy source they provide facts and pictures to back up their claims and just give facts rather than a narrative

video 3

1 proximity conflict emotions

2 I have watched local news in the past so I do have a little bias toward the channel it didn't affirm nor deny anything

3 I think it is a trustworthy source that has a lot of facts and an interview with one of the victims parents

1. Conflict, Oddity, Impact

2. Once again I still have a distrust and dislike towards Boeing and CNN. This does not change through the video

3. For this report yes, I think it can be trusted for what it's worth with outside reports, video evidence. And the entire door to the plane being found.

1. Currency, Impact

2.I already don't like Boeing or any of their practices, I have a high dislike towards their company and ethics.

3. I don't trust celebrity hosts or television all that much because of how much is censored or bad practices.

1.Proximity, Conflict, Human interest

2. I do have a problem with local news and their varying weather sources and how much I trust them on that. But now seeing this video can change my opinion on something other then their horrible weather reports.

3. Yes, because of the video evidence, and the parents coming in and seeing their loss.