Digital History Project Reviews

For this blog review, I focused on “JSTOR” and “Famous Trials.”

JSTOR

• Content: The content of JSTOR is from many different articles from historical archives from across the 20th and 21st centuries. The point-of-view is from many different perspectives on thousands of topics. The content is communicated through the articles and magazines found within the database
• Design: The content is shown through a minimalist design, with white and red colors, as well as a collection of artwork on the opening page. When it comes to accessibility, it seems hard for me to figure out. It has advanced search and “search help” options, as well as the ability to immediately cite and save specific articles that come up through searches, but they do not have a plethora of audio or visual mediums. They do have a chatbot that will answer questions for you about the website itself.
• Audience: The intended audience for JSTOR is people looking for primary sources rather than having to search through countless other sources to find important data. For that audience, I think it handles its goals very well.
• Digital Media: As said before, they have a chatbot that can answer questions. They also now have a “research tool,” which is an AI interface on the right side of the article’s webpage that lets you ask questions about the article to the left. However, a good portion of articles on the site have the research tool blocked at the behest of the publisher of the article.
• Creators: I could not find any information about those who run JSTOR on their site, other than the fact that it is run by the ITHAKA corporation.

Famous Trials

• Content: This site includes information about some of the most iconic trials in human history, such as the trial of Al Capone in 1931, the George Floyd murder trial of 2021, and even the Trial of Socrates from 399 BCE. The documents, maps, images, and information span many centuries, giving its audience a wide variety of information to choose from.
• Design: The design of the site is lackluster and seemingly dated. There is an artpiece of a trial at the top and weirdly blue-shaded sections of the site at the bottom. The pages for the trials are filled with links and secondary images underneath the text. However, you can click to focus on specific kinds of trials on the home page, such as trials focused on religion or free speech.
• Audience: I believe the intended audience of this site is people interested in the history of judicial trials in all cultures. Although it primarily focuses on European trials, there is a great deal of trials focused on the interconnection of many cultures. It also gives an unbiased look at the history of these trials and emphasizes why these trials are considered among the most important trials in human history.
• Digital Media: The site, as said before, seems not to have been updated recently. There does not seem to be any newer forms of accessibility or technology for the audience to engage with, unlike JSTOR’s chatbots.
• Creators: The only creator acknowledged at the top of the main page is Professor Douglas O. Linder, who works at the University of Missouri-Kansas City, School of Law.