I am doing research on the assassination of JFK. The purpose of this research is to further understand how much of the word put out by the Warren Commission, the people that officially claimed that Lee Harvey Oswald acted completely alone, is truth and how much is left for debate. Essentially, it is to find out whether or not the assassination was a conspiracy and if there was more than one shooter. So far I have found sources that cover a multitude of viewpoints on the topic. Some of them are firm that Oswald was not the only shooter because of the impossibilities that story holds while others claim all the evidence given by the Commission holds up and it is the only plausible explanation for the disastrous event. I am happy with the variety of my sources because not all of them are solely arguing whether or not it was a conspiracy or not. Many of them have a specific topic that they dive deeper into than the broader statement articles. For example, I am using an article that talks about the possibility that there was a bullet of friendly fire and it goes into detail about how the story is entirely possible but unknown as it is not intriguing and was pushed to the side by the public. Detailed perspectives such as this one are really the ones that expand my understanding of the situation and have been the ones that build my knowledge on the topic. However, the broad statement articles are also necessary because they tend to be the ones that give the easiest to understand facts that are easy to put into my paper. For example, one of my articles simply lists facts given by witnesses experts on the topic that explain why it was impossible for Oswald to have done the entire act on his own. This article will most likely be one of the best to quote in my paper because it is easy to understand without background knowledge, and therefore easier to read for the general audience.
Something I would like to figure out is whether or not I need to choose my own personal viewpoint before I go any further into my research. While up to this point it has been an advantage to read without any sort of bias, I am wondering if a bias could guide me in the direction that I will ultimately be writing in. I also need to decide what the purpose of my paper will be. Is it to state my belief on whether or not it was a conspiracy, or is it simply to present the controversy to inform the public?