Remember that the best authorities on disability are those with some form of disability. They can speak directly to their own experience. For the purpose of this class, you may consider any source as valid as long as you can confirm the person has some form of disability. Of course, you will need at least one (1) scholarly source of support for your research, but your other supporting research could come in the form of a blog, a Tweet, a press statement, newsletter, a TED Talk, presentation slides, a documentary, etc. Be creative, as it will matter more how you use your resources to support your work than it will matter what type of resources you use.
Authority Is Constructed and Contextual is one of the frames of information literacy basics, and refers to the recognition that information resources are drawn from their creators’ expertise and credibility based on the information need and the context in which the information will be used. Experts view authority with an attitude of informed skepticism and an openness to new perspectives, additional voices, and changes in schools of thought.
"Peer-review" is one of the primary processes of constructing authority in the academic context. Scholarly journal articles differ from magazines/newspapers in that they are written by and for scholars (and not for the general public), and most notably they undergo the "peer-review" process. Also note that some books from university presses may also have gone through similar peer-review processes and may also be considered as scholarly. See the following table to help your distinguish between scholarly and popular resources:
| Scholarly (Journals) | Popular (Magazines/Newspapers) |
| Written by scholars, academics, and researchers. | Written by journalists, columnists, reporters, bloggers, etc. |
| Written for (and by) those with expertise in the field. | Written for non-experts and the casually interested. |
| Thoroughly referenced, with credible and reputable sources. | Sometimes referenced, but rarely with academic/scholarly sources. |
| Written to advance scholarship and academic knowledge. | Written to entertain, inform, provoke, and make money. |
| Usually reviewed by academics and scholars (hence “peer-review”). | Usually reviewed by an editor, though freelance work may be un-reviewed. |
| Examples: Annual Review of Critical Psychology, Cinema Journal, American Journal of Education, Nature | Examples: Time, Newsweek Global, National Geographic, The New Yorker |
Some other quick indicators can help to help distinguish between a scholarly and a popular source. One of the first indicators will be the article's title -- a scholarly work will usually squeeze a lot of keywords into its title while a popular work will tend to be much more general or lead with a provocative question. A reference list (bibliography/works cited) is also usually an indicator of an academic/scholarly work, though often popular news articles will contain links throughout the text. The language of a scholarly work may also contain a lot of discipline-specific jargon, and may be denser than the language used in popular works intended to be read by a wide audience. Popular works tend to feature more photographs and pictures, while scholarly works may feature more diagrams. You might also ask yourself a question like, "Would I read this on the bus?" Of course, maybe you would study on the bus, but the general idea is to ask whether the source seems like a casual read or not.
Below is a video explaining the difference (and importance of knowing the difference!) between popular and scholarly articles. I've also included 5 pairs of popular and scholarly articles, where each pair discusses the exact same research study, but in very different ways. Notice how short and general the popular articles are, while the scholarly articles are extremely detailed and contain a number of references. *Note: I didn't make this video but am borrowing from a video used at Illinois College's Schewe Library (my previous library) that was itself stitched together from two other videos by different libraries... they already explained it better than I ever could!*
With social media like Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. where you can curate the information you see, it's easy to get yourself in a media filter bubble and only see information that only reinforces your established worldview.
Companies like Google also have sophisticated algorithms to give you search results tailored to what they think you want (and because their business model is based on advertising revenue and monetizing certain keywords): if you run the same search while logged in to a Google account, while logged out, on a campus computer, on your personal computer, or on someone else's computer while they are logged in or not, etc. you may find yourself getting different results. It can still be an excellent resource (especially since you won't always have access to college/university resources and are likely to rely on web tools like this in the future for your research needs), but it's worth being aware of this. You might also use the Google Advanced Search which can add a number of useful tricks to your searches!
Below are some resources that can help you sort through bias that you might find in the news as well as some sources that are generally considered to be politically neutral and factually accurate: