1. The document aims to argue that using cell phones is not harmful based on a news story published on 26/4/2012. 2. The story cites a lack of evidence that cell phone use has negative health effects, but notes that further research is still needed according to one expert quoted. 3. The document evaluates the credibility of the news story by checking other websites and finds they report the same information, suggesting the story is reasonably unbiased.

1. The date is
The aims of The new story
released is
this new story achieves its aim
26/4/2012, which is
is clear. It’s because this it
today
trying to say says in the title
that there is no and the text
harm for using saying there is
cell phones. no evidence of
harmful.
The website is
This new story not biased. In
has an author the text, it does
which named say that using
Jane Hughes cell phones
would not effect
your health, but
Prof. Anthony
Swerdlow says
I took a piece that we still
of information have to keep
out of this
an eye on the
story and
effects of using
checked and At the bottom of the page, cell phones.
other websites there’re links to other
said the same. websites of the same story.

2. 1. There isn’t any author
2. Its aim is to persuade us
buy dehydration water.
3. The site doesn’t achieve its
aim because its information
doesn’t appeal to me.
4. There is no information
relates to this topic.
5. There isn’t any date
6. It is biased because it only
says dehydrated water in a
positive way.
7. There aren’t any links lead
to other websites.
I don’t trust this website
because it is biased and we
don’t know whether the
information is a fact.