Answer 1. An argument is an art; it is a logical analysis of any situation or issue supported by a persuasive evidence. Key features of the argument include a candid position, supporting background information, persuasive evidence, and acknowledgment of the counterargument.
These characteristics outrightly negate taking an extreme position without having the facts supporting it. Sticking to the extreme is not logical in itself. Doing so will be tantamount to frivolous writing, not a well-thought argumentative piece. The writer will render the audience all but perplexed and annoyed. For instance, one cannot convince readers in just stating that the technology is always appalling, and social media sites have done nothing except ruining the face-to-face communication. For, there is always an opposite stance and not paying heed to it violates the very essence of an effective argument.
The excellence of an argument also relies on the quality of the information that it hinges upon. It is why researchers have emphasized the need for proper citations and referencing in the argumentative research. The primary goal of the researcher is not to 'win'; it is to persuade the readers and supporting the 'idea' with the background information so as to enhance the chances of getting their adulation and approval.
Explicitly, the argument is about taking a reasonable stance and supporting that stand with the compelling evidence. In discussing the ill-effects of technology, one must not forget to acknowledge the benefits it has imparted to human beings. Presenting both sides of the topic but making readers swayed by the one is what makes a plausible argument.
Answer 2. The Internet is a double-edged sword. While it contains biased, dubious, inaccurate and misguided information, there is no dearth of highly-reliable, valuable, credible, and informative sources that can be of great importance to the research paper. With both types of resources available, it is a must-have skill for the researcher to validate and discern the reliable information from the biased one. Else, he might end up in accommodating inaccurate evidence and false opinion thereby screwing up the entire study.
There is a cross-referencing strategy, called the link command, that can assist the writer in validating the information. The researcher will need to go to AltaVista and type "link: web address." It will highlight a list of websites that are linked to the searched URL. Having a cursory look on the linked websites will proffer a broad perspective concerning the quality of the searched website. For instance, if a particular website is linked to educational and governmental institutions, it is more likely to have trustworthy information than those which are linked to only commercial domains.
Alternatively, the website domain, author's name, functionality, design, style, structure and modification details are good indicators of the quality status of the website. Domains as .gov, .edu, .org belong to the government, educational, and non-profit institutions respectively. These are credible and reliable. However, caution is required while using .com and .net. Websites that are easy to navigate, pleasing to look at, and accessible to visually-impaired and physically-challenged are more likely to possess relevant information.
References
APU Writing Center. (2014). Writing an Argument. Retrieved September 7, 2016, from apu.edu: http://www.apu.edu/live_data/files/288/writing_an_argument.pdf
ASCD. (2000). Education Update. Retrieved September 7, 2016, from ascd.org: http://www.ascd.org/publications/newsletters/education-update/jun00/vol42/num04/Validating-Information-on-the-Internet.aspx
Bergmann, L. S. (2009). Academic Research and Writing: Inquiry and Argument in College. Longman.
Lane, R. (2010). STOP! Evaluate Website Before Use. Dental Assistant , 12-45.
