research methods

What is the journalistic and scientific understanding of truth and provisional truth? How does this understanding pertain to the notion that the establishment of a causal relationship is never more than plausible (refer to the criteria for establishing plausible causality, including that correlation does not indicate causation)? What are the roles of unit of analysis (and corresponding logical errors to avoid), research design (cross-sectional, longitudinal), triangulation, and multi-method research in this regard?
What is transparency in journalism, and how does it pertain to positionality?
What is the ethical protocol for interviewing and photography?
How is the evaluation of the validity of information/data sources important in not only journalism but also social research? What are the roles of sampling, triangulation, and multi-method research in evaluating such validity?

Part two

Evaluate any two of the following examples of media content in view of the criteria for critically assessing media content (no matter what its political orientation or our own personal political orientation may be).
New York celebrates legalizing abortion until birth as Catholic bishops question Cuomos faith (Fox News 2019) 
Bidens border malfeasance crime against humanity (Newsmax 2021)

NBC/Brian Williams reporting on Hurricane Katrina in New Orleans

(2005 Peabody Award)
(What principles of professional journalism reporting did Brian Williams [and NBC] violate? How were these violations uncovered after NBC/Williams won a Peabody Award for journalism excellence? How did NBC respond to the violations, and was its response appropriate or not?)

Evaluation criteria
How do market issues bias the sample of who/what gets reported?
(Taking the above question into account) Who/what is reporting/publishing/funding the info and why (positionality: perspectives/interests/biases)?
Whats the title/headline/scene-setting and argument (content, tone)?
How valid are the depictions of context in relation to the reports headline, lead sentences/scene-setting introduction, and information presented?
How valid is the evidence (sampling, data validity, triangulation, multi-method, logic of analysis: multiple trustworthy sources)?
What do other knowledgeable persons/sources say/document (sampling, triangulation, multi-method)?
Transparency (positionality; clarity about the above, including what relevant other stories and evidence/sources arent reported, and what other questions are not answered)?
How valid is the logic of the argument and the conclusions, in view of all the above?
If relevant: Have ethical issues been addressed (such as interview and photography protocol)?