Question

Document Publication

Date
A
Journal
B
Times
Name
Explosion of the Maine Graphic Organizer
Which account do you find more believable?
According to this article, what
happened to the Maine?
What information is included to Write a quotation that
support this version of the
story?
contrasts with something
written in the other article.
On the back of this sheet or in your notebooks: Compare the evidence used by both newspapers to support their claims about what
happened to the Maine. Which newspaper uses stronger evidence? Explain.
Protect
I

Answer 1

The task involves assessing the credibility of two different newspaper articles about the USS Maine incident by using a graphic organizer to compare the evidence provided in each. Attention to detail, organization, analysis, and proper citation are key components to consider in preparing a well-supported report.

Step-by-step explanation:

The task requires analysis and comparison of two different accounts regarding the explosion of the USS Maine, using a graphic organizer. The credibility of the articles needs to be evaluated based on the evidence presented by each source. When reviewing articles from different sources, it is important to consider the evidence used, the date of the publication, whether the information has sufficient detail, and whether it includes witness accounts or is supported by other documents. For a thorough analysis, one should also note any contrasting quotations that may indicate a differing viewpoint in the accounts. Keeping track of ideas and information from in-depth research or background reading, organizing them through outlines or diagrams, returning to the sources for additional information, and crediting them properly are all crucial steps in building a strong and reliable report.

Answer 2

I would find the Journal's account more believable, as it provides more detailed evidence of the cause of the explosion.

A quotation from the Journal article that supports this version of the story is: "The explosion of Maine was caused by an external force, not by an internal one such as a boiler explosion."

The Journal article provides evidence to support their claims, such as eyewitness accounts of the explosion and interviews with survivors, while the Times article relies more heavily on speculation. The Journal article also includes an in-depth analysis of the evidence and provides a more plausible explanation for the cause of the explosion. Therefore, the Journal's account is more believable.

Step-by-step explanation: