The article I chose is called "Human Trafficking: The Need for Better Data". By Frank Laczko. It was published in November of 2002. The link is functional and the main title of the website is "Migration information source". The author is credible because it states that he works for the International Organization for Immigration. He also left his email in case you have any questions about the article. Laczko list's multiple sources that he got his information from and give them credit by citing them.
This article focused on how scarce amount of information and facts we have about Human Trafficking. Because the problem is so sketchy and under the radar, that people dont know enough about it to really narrow down the exact amount of people being affected, where ts taking place the most or even what people group or different groups of people are starting and doing it. The fact that so many women and children and even some men are greatly being affected by all of this is scary and he is trying to get more people to be aware of Human Trafficking.
In my experience, I didn't know that much about human trafficking until a few years ago where they made a movie about it. "Taken" was the movie title and if it wasn't for that movie I probably wouldn't have found out how important the topic actually was. That just show's how much more people need to be aware of the problem .
Also, the article talked about not having enough information about human trafficking because it is so shady and sketchy. I think that they should figure out why they're not getting enough information on it and investigate that. They can figure out murders and other crimes but for some reason they can keep this crime under that wraps more than others. Maybe its because they're mostly in other countries but its also going on in this country.
Taylor, you are definitely showing improvement in your depth of coverage and I can see that you're working hard to get up to speed with this project.
ReplyDeleteAs you continue to research, consider the following suggestions and questions.
1. An article published in 2002 is 11 years old; how does the fact that this article is over a decade old affect it's credibility? Because there are more current sources, you want to lean more towards using those.
2. Where was the article published? You correctly point out the credibility of the author, but what about the credibility of the publisher (website, magazine, newspaper, etc)? Who is the typical audience? And what possible biases might exist?