In the article "Video Surveillance: Invasion of privacy or reasonable response to misconduct?" found on the Emond-Harnden website, an argument is posed for the reader. The content of this argument is of great import to the read, but something possibly more significant is the credibility of the website. In essence, can the information this website provides be trusted enough to direct people in their lives and sway their opinions in the way of the argument. There are many parts of an argument that must be evaluated first, before the argument can be valued as credible. According to Browne and Keeley of their book Evaluating Online Resources "Healthy doubt is [a] positive self-defense" (24) when it comes to evaluating an argument and its credibility.
             Anyone has the ability to write a website, but for that information to be admitted as credible the author must be first established as trustworthy. Many questions must be asked about the author to establish their credibility, and seeing as how this article is written by "Emond-Harnden", the credibility of a whole company must be established. Emond-Harnden is a law firm that litigates for unions as well as the companies that employ them in labor disputes as well as other troubles. Already, biases can be drawn from the website, they are not writing this article to purely inform and educate the reader, but they are writing it, in part, for their own personal, profitable gain. Second, can this website be considered an authority on the information provided? In this case, a tentative yes is the answer, seeing as how this website argues cases of this exact nature to the courts and arbitrators. Even though they may argue these cases they still do so under the idea that they will profit from their work and court battles. The authority of a website on a certain subject is one of the strongest ways to establish a website's credibility.
             Possibly one of ...