Speaking professionally here (as in professional web-geek), a search on several search engines for each individuals names returned acceptably consistant results. By that, I mean they were all mostly in agreement.
A search on John Doar returns a great deal of sites that are .edu, and .gov. Praise for his work is common, and out of the 50 links I looked through quickly from Google, I didn't see any disagreeing on this persons deserving praise.
A search on Morris Dees however returns numerous sites at very opposite ends of the spectrum. The more mainstream sites sing his praises, while the 'pro-south' sites condemn him. Many of those condemning him appear (from the quick look through Google) to simply be copying the same information, while the mainstream covers a wider timeline and more events/appearences.
About the most credible commentary against Dees that I could find was Pat Buchanan.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29776
Now, some of the sites that are slamming him are sites that I do consider viable. A good many of the slamming sites however are not on my 'good list'. As the information is consistant, I would take it with a grain of salt. All of the "good" sites are .edus, whereas none of the "bad" sites are for example.
If someone more credible than Pat B, or a more mainstream source is located validating the claims against Dees (for example, criminal stuff should be verifiable), then I would give the negative more weight. Until then, I have to take it with a few (thousand) grains of salt.
A search on John Doar returns a great deal of sites that are .edu, and .gov. Praise for his work is common, and out of the 50 links I looked through quickly from Google, I didn't see any disagreeing on this persons deserving praise.
A search on Morris Dees however returns numerous sites at very opposite ends of the spectrum. The more mainstream sites sing his praises, while the 'pro-south' sites condemn him. Many of those condemning him appear (from the quick look through Google) to simply be copying the same information, while the mainstream covers a wider timeline and more events/appearences.
About the most credible commentary against Dees that I could find was Pat Buchanan.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=29776
Now, some of the sites that are slamming him are sites that I do consider viable. A good many of the slamming sites however are not on my 'good list'. As the information is consistant, I would take it with a grain of salt. All of the "good" sites are .edus, whereas none of the "bad" sites are for example.
If someone more credible than Pat B, or a more mainstream source is located validating the claims against Dees (for example, criminal stuff should be verifiable), then I would give the negative more weight. Until then, I have to take it with a few (thousand) grains of salt.
