Evaluation of Social Media Sources

While searching for Social Media sources, I had a difficult time finding posts from authors of both the general and scholarly sources, and even the people they mentioned, so I just recycled my search terms. Once I did that, I found a few sources, and the two most useful are shown below.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/2015/09/01/stem-cells-fda-athletes-joseph-purita-rolando-mcclain/71504998/

• Credibility: The individual that tweeted about/shared the article is Katrina Karkazis, a Senior Research Scholar at Stanford University in the Center for Biomedical Ethics. (If you google her, this information can be found on her website.) Since she belongs to a University, and Stanford at that, she has immense credibility bestowed upon her.
• Location: She is not directly involved with the exact topic or at the research location, but she studies Biomedical Ethics and has focused on "sex testing of elite female athletes", so she can be directly related to the subject areas of biology and sports.
• Network: She both follows and is followed by other journalists, athletes, human activists, and news sites.
• Content: Considering she links to the story and the story is on USA Today, it is safe to say the information can be corroborated.
• Contextual Updates: Katrina researches Biomedical Ethics, but her main focus is not on stem cells.  
• Age: She joined Twitter in December of 2011.
• Reliability: Considering both her and USA Today's credentials, I would consider the source of the information reliable.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2015-08/uhcm-ucm082015.php

• Credibility: There is no specific person that posted this tweet; rather, the account states that it contains live content curated by top stem cell influencers. They further provide this link to view a list of their influencers, and many of those are organizations that's sole purpose is plain out stem cell research.
• Location: They are not in "the location" of the controversy, as the controversy takes place world wide. On the other hand, they are directly related to the topic I am discussing (stem cells), and post purely on this topic of interest. 
• Network: There are many other accounts that focus on stem cell research that follow this user. The account does not seem to "associate" with anybody, but rather they share new information and links to other stories discussing stem cells.
• Content: Yes their information can be corroborated as they are sharing stories from other news sites.
• Contextual Updates: They have posted a few recent tweets with stories that discuss athletes, stem cells, and the processes the athletes go through. They do seem to fill in some information gaps.
• Age: This twitter account was formed in November of 2014, so it is almost a year old. 
• Reliability: I find that in general, this account is not reliable; however, since it links to an article on website that is a Global Source for Science News, I find the article itself reliable.