Useful Sources

Sullum, Jacob. "Does The First Amendment Protect Marijuana Ads?" Forbes. Forbes
Magazine, 19 Feb. 2014. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.
This op-ed by Jacob Sullum falls right on my topic concerning the issue of advertising marijuana. It provided me a new perspective on the opponents of restricting marijuana ads by justifying the right cannabis ads under the protection of First Amendment. The audience intends to be citizens of marijuana-legal states. Sullum is the author of two drug defense books which are Saying Yes: In Defense of Drug Use and For Your Own Good: The Anti-Smoking Crusade and the Tyranny of Public Health. Therefore, he holds authority in his op-ed on Forbes. The purpose of this editorial not only shares his opinion on the regulations of cannabis ads, but also conveys information about what the first amendment missed. He supported his opinion that restrictions on marijuana ads is difficult to guarantee through federal court by throwing several previous supreme court cases in his editorial. Although some of these cases are outdated, it is a fundamental evidence towards this 2014 editorial which reflects recent controversial. The author included hyperlinks in his op-ed that lead readers to locate on the sources he used. Overall, Sullum’s op-ed is balanced because he included perspectives of both advocates and opponents of restricting marijuana advertisements.

Walden, Nicole, and Mitch Earleywine. "How High: Quantity as a Predictor of Cannabis-
related Problems." Harm Reduction Journal Harm Reduct J (2008): 20. Print.
This scholarly research journal on how the quantity used of marijuana causes social problems is relevant to my topic because it supports my reasoning on why cannabis ads should be restricted. The audience for this source is most likely for experts working on psychology and biology fields. Accordingly, the authors have authority on this research journal because Nicole Walden is an expert in psychology and Mitch Earleywine is an expert in biomed. The purpose of their research is to convince experts and intellects that the use of marijuana is positively correlated to social problems. The evidences that they use include opinions from other experts and survey from cannabis users. This is also a very recent research published in 2008. In addition, the lengthy and professional citation of all the sources they used at the end of the paper shows credibility in the authors. However, the information in this source is not very balanced because the research hypothesized that quantity and frequent use of marijuana will cause social problems since the beginning and throughout the paper.

Unuseful Sources

Kabir, Sumaiya. "20 Medical Benefits of Marijuana You Probably Never Knew." Lifehack. Lifehack. Web. 14 Oct. 2015.
This is an article written by Sumaiya Kabir, who listed 20 beneficiaries of marijuana. I did not quote, summarize, or paraphrase any of her words in my essay, but I used her article for my own background knowledge on marijuana. I believe this piece of information is relevant to my topic since I need to know the pros and cons of marijuana itself in order to argue my point. The audience of this article is mostly young bloggers like Kabir, as well as those who have awareness of their personal health and lifestyle. Since Kabir is a freelance article writer and a blogger, she has less authority to provide information on the topic than experts do who writes scholarly journals. The purpose of her article seems to simply convey factual information about the benefits of marijuana to her audience. Furthermore, she did use evidence of well-known studies, biological terms, and experts in the field to uphold the facts she tells. However, the article does not have a publishing date that I can specifically refer to although it is obvious that this article is written in the current century because of some recent evidences that she used. Since this is only an article, she is not required to professionally cite the sources used; but instead, she created hyperlinks on significant terms and names that readers can refer to if they do not understand. The information on the article is definitely not balanced because all facts lean towards benefits of marijuana, as mentioned in the title.