Evaluation of Social Media Sources

In this blog post I will look at the credibility of social media sources that discuss my controversy of the difficulties of good historical conservation, advances over the past 30 years, and how carelessness can destroy art.

Becker, Hallye "Screenshot of Samantha De Tillio's tweet" 09/05/15 via Twitter

Samantha De Tillio, anger over ancient rock art in Utah

• Credibility: This Twitter account belongs to Samantha De Tillio, a historian and curatorial assistant for Museum of Art and Design in New York. This increases her standing in understanding the art world. 
• Location: Tillio currently lives in New York City, which is quite a distance from Utah. However I don't think this discredits her, as she cites her distaste from a linked article about Utah. 
• Network: The account is followed by several curators and conservators, which shows her link to the art world. However, her account is unverified. 
• Content: This post refers to an article on hyperallergic.com. I'm unsure of the reliability of hyperallergic.com, and the author of the article is  Laura C. Mallonee, a M.A. in Cultural Reporting and Criticism from NYU and a B.F.A. in painting from Missouri State University.
• Contextual Updates: This Twitter account posts primarily about other historical advances and social issues. She clearly has a strong interest in these topics, but it is important to note that she doesn't have a strong standing in the field. 
• Age: This account was started in April of 2014. It hasn't been around for a very long time, which takes away some of it's reliability. 
• Reliability: Overall, I would say this source is moderately reliable at best. Samantha De Tillio is a fairly active participant in the art world, but her account is unverified. Her tweet links to an article on a website where the credibility could be questionable, though a little more research could determine it's reliability a little better. 

The Getty Iris's Google+ post, "Thirty Years of Advancing Conservation"

Becker, Hallye. "Screenshot of The Getty Iris", 9/05/15v via Google+

• Credibility: The blog belongs to the Getty, and the post is written by Timothy P. Whalen, the director of the Getty Conservation Institute. This is someone leading in the field of conservation, which adds a lot to his credibility. 
• Location: Whalen currently lives in California, and writes about the Getty which is also in California. His proximity and close relationship with his article does increase his and his writing's credibility. 
• Network: Whalen is the director of the Conservation Institute, so it can be assumed that he is heavily involved with other important conservators, art historians, and other valuable people in the field. 
• Content: The article reflects back on the achievements the Getty Conservation Institute has had over the past thirty years. Everything is properly cited and well written. 
• Contextual Updates: The Getty's blog is updated almost daily, and has many articles with various content. All papers are written by scholars, interns, volunteers, and others associated with the museum.The Getty is considered quite reliable in it's information, seeing as it is an important institution. 
• Age: The Getty's blog began in April of 2010. It has been around for about five years, which makes me believe most of the issues have been worked out and is fairly reliable. 
• Reliability: Overall, I would say this source is pretty reliable. Whalen is an active participant in the art world, has worked for The Getty since 1998 and is Director of Conservation. His article is on a website where the credibility is more than likely assured, and it seems likely that he is knowledgable and reliable for his field.