Evaluating sources with the SIFT method
The SIFT method for evaluating sources was developed by Mike Caulfield. You can access more information about his method here: Sift: the Four Moves. All the information and methods referred to on this page were created by him and are adapted here using a CC BY 4.0 license. The SIFT method is helpful for sorting through what is credible and what is not, especially in regards to online media, which can be published and shared with very little oversight. Caulfield describes the SIFT method as "a short list of things to do when looking at a source," which are then attached to effect web search techniques. 
S - STOP (Mike Caulfield SIFT tutorial videos)
This video explains why we need to be cautious about online resources and introduces the topic. Watch the first tutorial and then consider the first step. Before you share an article or a video online or use a source for your essay or project, STOP! Do I know this source? Do I know its reputation? Do I know whether this source is reliable of credible?
I - Investigate the source (Mike Caulfield SIFT tutorial videos)
When you investigate the source, you need to go to outside sources to learn information about their reputation. Wikipedia is a great starting point to check the reputation of a source.
F - Find the original source (Mike Caulfield SIFT tutorial videos)
The next step is to check the veracity of an article by finding the best sources for the topic. These are often the original or primary sources, but can also be more reputable news sources with a strong track record. You can use fact checking organizations to check on the reputation of sites for accuracy Use some of the sites provided on this page. As you research, keep a list of trusted sites whom you have verified. For images, you can do a reverse image search.
T - Trace claims, quotes, and media back to the original context (Mike Caulfield SIFT tutorial videos)
To trace the claims of an article, make sure you click through links provided to be sure the original source says what the article claims. Look at the context. Was the information or media contained within the source accurately represented?