One reason credibility is important is to allow the readers to know the source of the facts. They can then validate for themselves whether the information that was given to them was indeed valid. In the article titled “Organ Transplantation” there was not an identified author, therefore this article lacked credibility for all of its “facts”. In the article titled “Brain Death and Organ Donation” the author was identified as James Dubois, giving this article more credibility than the first. By comparing the two articles it’s clear that the article “Brain Death and Organ Donation” was more believable and the facts could be found from the sources …show more content…
Facts can help a reader get a better visual and complete understanding of the topic. In paragraph seven the author states that “There is no documented case of a patient recovering from brain death.” However, in the article “Organ Donation” the author lacked when presenting facts. This article was more of an overview and didn’t go into much detail. The few facts that were stated throughout this article were also quite vague.
One flaw this article written by James Dubois had, was that it mainly focused on the Catholic Church and their beliefs. I would have liked to read more opinions from various doctors in different hospitals, rather than Popes a part of the churches. In paragraph five the author states that “Paul Byrne, a former president of the Catholic Medical Association and a long time opponent of brain death criteria… argued that it violates the fifth commandment of the divine Decalogue.” In the article “Organ Transplantation” the author gathered information from various sources and distributed these sources evenly throughout the article. These sources also seemed to be significantly less biased than those written by James