Evaluation of Social Media Sources

In this blog post, I will be analyzing 2 sources which I found from searching "human genetic engineering". Here are the sources I found.

Source 1
The first source I found is taken from nature.com, one of the well respecting engineering journals mentioned in previous posts. So, I could already tell that this was a credible source simply because of that. I did some more research on the author and her name is Leslie Pray and has a PhD. It's difficult trying to find engineers who are very active on social media because that's just not in the job description. So, I couldn't find a Leslie Pray with a PhD on twitter...and no one was really talking about her either.
Regardless, the source is obviously credible and includes a short list of references they got their information from. Since this was written in 2008, I think we can rule out any amateurs being heavily involved. However, since this field is always making progress, the year 2008 may even be a little dated for a source on human embryo engineering.

Dmitry. "Social LongShadow Icons". 9/10/2014 via Deviant Art. Creative Commons License.

Source 2
This next source I found is from a site called Designer Babies and focuses more on the controversy. I searched for this on twitter and there were several people tweeting about it. Some tweeted links to CNN regarding the controversy which were helpful. But, those people tweeting didn't really have any background that I could see on their accounts in genetic engineering. The tweeters were mainly just one-time tweeters about this topic. There is also a short list of references on this source, which is another sign of reliability and credibility.