The reporting of the news story was clearly and accurate with sufficient depth and breadth because it mention how the identity of an account from an individual was stolen and was badgered for miss use purposes.
On this story I believe that some facts were ignore to be reported on this article because it does not clearly states if it was actually reported to police department of any other federal institute for follow up. This story does clearly states alternative perspectives because it actually states or guides the individual what to do to prevent from identity from been stolen in the future.
I do believe that there were some assumptions questionable because according to the social security department is stating on this article what do to prevent identity from been stolen after the fact when it happen and not before it happen. There were no implications ignored on this story because it clearly identifies the occurrence.
It is important to make distinctions when undertaking a critical evaluation because it is how you classify the good arguments of the item that you are valuing. This will be your source on your claims on your assessments. You need to have a source to support your claim; otherwise your presentation will not be credible.
Detecting Media Bias (Part B)
The way I would use curiosity in this topic is by encouraging people to ask questions about any doubt regarding making any payments by check or online before making them and not giving any personal information by phone or online to prevent from identity from been stolen. The reason that I think these strategies might be effective is because when people asks questions before they give any personal information by phone or online, they can figure out if it could actually be a credible source of making any payments.
In a persuasive case you are annoying to influence someone to think a convinced way based upon facts but it is bias because they are trying to...