Using The Guardian as my source for comments, two of them stood out as they did not seem credible at all.
Jankowski, Jessica. "Screenshot" 8/29/2015. |
Jankowski, Jessica. "Screenshot" 8/29/2015 |
Although the use of creative wording in "there's no hope for Hope" is attention grabbing, this commenter seems to be expressing a fantasy about an athlete that doesn't seem to be relevant. By going off topic and mentioning dog fighting and dog "TORTURING/MURDERING" the commenter looses credibility. TheLongMarcher does seem to be against athletes participating in illegal activities as he believes there is no "hope for Hope", however by skewing off topic his/her credibility is lost.
Some commenters showed credibility while discussing the topic on Hope.
Jankowski, Jessica. "Screenshot" 8/29/2015 |
This commenter expresses a credible fear about sports targeting "key players' to simply "side-line them" in the future. The reference to the US constitution that a person is to be presumed innocent until proven guilty adds credibility to the commenter's opinion. ProfHentryHiggins adds a valuable insight to not just Solo's position, but the impact that media has on athlete's lives and reputations.
Jankowski, Jessica. "Screenshot" 8/29/2015 |
Reflection:
After reading both of Carter and Jayni's blogs a lot of similarities emerged. In general, commenters who have personal experience relating to the topic of controversy are more credible than those who do not. Additionally, if a commenter personally attacks a person related to the controversy rather than commenting without personal opinion their credibility is lost.