30 Matching Annotations
  1. May 2024
  2. Mar 2024
    1. Likewise, we “trusted the process,” but the process didn’t save Toy Story 2 either. “Trust theProcess” had morphed into “Assume that the Process Will Fix Things for Us.” It gave ussolace, which we felt we needed. But it also coaxed us into letting down our guard and, in theend, made us passive. Even worse, it made us sloppy.
  3. Feb 2024
    1. Erneuerbare Energien sind der wichtigste Treiber des Wirtschaftswachstums in China. Zugleich droht China die Klimaziele für 2025 zu verfehlen. 2023 hat der Energieverbrauch um 5,7% zugenommen. Zwischen 2021 Uhr und 2023 wuchsen die CO2-Emissionen jährlich um durchschnittlich 3, 8%. Ein Hauptgrund dafür ist die Stimulierung der Wirtschaft in China selbst und den Ländern, in die China exportiert, nach der Covid-Krise. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/22/growth-in-co2-emissions-leaves-china-likely-to-miss-climate-targets

  4. Jul 2023
  5. Jun 2022
  6. Oct 2021
    1. Shiva exposes the 1%’s model of philanthrocapitalism, which is about deploying unaccountable money to bypass democratic structures, derail diversity, and impose totalitarian ideas based on One Science, One Agriculture, and One History.

      The same topic is covered by Anand Giridharadas in Winners Take All and by Amy Westervelt in her podcast Drilled exploring the history of public relations.

      We had the privilege of interacting with Vandana Shiva in the Trimtab Space Camp course, focused on regenerative agriculture, offered by the Buckminster Fuller Institute.

      Vandana Shiva, a world-renowned environmental thinker, activist, feminist, philosopher of science, writer, and science policy advocate, is the founder of Navdanya Research Foundation for Science, Technology, and Ecology in India and President of Navdanya International.

      The recipient of many awards, including the Right Livelihood Award, (the ‘Alternative Nobel Prize’) and the Sydney Peace Prize, she has been named among the top five “Most Important People in Asia” by AsiaWeek.

      She is a prolific writer and author of numerous books and serves on the board of the International Forum on Globalization, and a member of the executive committee of the World Future Council.

    1. Westervelt won the 2016 prestigious Edward R. Murrow award for her series.

      Independent journalism for the win.

    2. Drilled, her climate change podcast, is in its sixth season, with more than a million downloads.

      I am inspired by Amy Westervelt’s deep exploration of the history of public relations, advertising, and marketing to polish the reputations of billionaires and fossil fuel corporations in her podcast, Drilled.

  7. Oct 2017
    1. at was backed up with another opinion rather than a fact that would help strengthen their argument. Although, Shieh has some strong ideas an arguments it wasn’t enough for the reader to be persuaded. As far as the sources Shieh could have used more in order to reply to counter-arguments.

      Your evaluation of both texts shows promise and some good insights. I do think you could make your discussion of strengths and weaknesses more concrete through more in-depth investigation of evidence, sources and strategies. But this is good, solid work.

    2. He should include who the authors are in order for the readers to know why we should accept that the information they are providing holds truth.

      Good point. It may also be relevant that the authors are not medical researchers and so do not have relevant expertise.

    3. To popular belief caused by government researchers as well as drug free campaigns, people who inhale smoke in the air from other smokers is in danger.

      Not sure I follow this.

    4. It is important to not only evaluate your own digital writing, but the creations of others online. It is important to analyze and figure out accuracies, assumptions, as well as biases that may hold truth. Speaking of truth, because the Internet and media can be available to anyone, people are able to also provide the public with untrue facts.

      Yes, these two elements are an important part of Boyd's argument.

    1. This would help me be informed on how to critically analyze the information I look up and use.

      I like the way you bookend your response with personal connections. It gives the response a nice symmetry.

    2. Boyd puts it, “sophisticated internet participants.” Social media shouldn’t be their only outlet to media literacy. Skills and active learning are needed to develop this digital age, which would help better engagement and technical skills that will cultivate the technological advanced world we have shifted towards.

      Another good account of a key claim

    3. For example, teens may have the access to computers funded by schools, but the time spent associated may not make them skillful at navigating technological tools. She claims that the “unevenness of skills, literacy, and socially meaningful access” contribute to the raised concern of the “technology advanced” generation.

      This is a strong, thoughtful account of Boyd's argument

    4. Boyd also claims that there is digital inequality and that digital natives mask the notion that there aren’t different degrees of access and skills alongside emerging technologies experienced by different youth.

      Good observation - this is one of her key claims.

    5. n particular, as I read this topic, it felt completely relatable to my views and values on credible search engines. My teachers throughout middle school and high school had also advised students that Wikipedia wasn’t a reputable source to use. I agree with her claims that teens have been in the habit of not fully utilizing these types of technological tools.

      Interesting connections to Boyd's argument.

    1. Writing has become “dispensable” in a sense that we are shifting into the electronic age where newspapers and books are being replaced by television and radio. The way we communicate has definitely changed over the years, where it has become more accessible and convenient for society. The attack of writing argues that these shifts in today’s society has put some type of devalue in rhetoric.

      Diverges from the text a little - not sure these are Y&S's claims

    2. Why Write? A Consideration they argue that writing is usually attacked because it can induce forgetfulness and doesn’t stimulate practice their memory.

      Not quite - they quote Plato as doing this. They think Plato is wrong but was asking interesting questions.

    3. The “Sundiata” text illustrates the oral culture and it’s qualities that solidify Ong’s statements. The text consists of two versions of a story that are orally composed. Throughout the text, you can clearly see where emotion or expression is exemplified. As Ong mentions, this type of writing is able to emphasize meaning for the readers and helps them follow what the story is trying to effectively convey.

      This seems interesting but a little vague. You might find it easier to talk about concrete elements such as repetition, formulas, participation (call and response) etc.

    4. Oral culture and expression in writing gives more meaning and helps aid readers to distinguish important information from the context.

      Again, a little hard to follow. Try to unpack and elaborate such complex relationships.

    5. Ong begins with explaining orality qualities and suggests that these words are power-driven. It is compared to typographic writing and writers who focus more on names and labels.

      OK - but stylistically, watch for consistency of referents (elements that establish coherence)

    6. To further the understanding of the impact of the oral culture Ong states that within oral cultures you only know what you can “recall” where as in literate cultures you know what you can look up

      Yes, one of his central claims. It is a fairly simple claim but one he believes has important implications.

  8. Sep 2017
    1. Lock sheds light on the “order and clearness” rhetoric is useful for. Locke deems rhetoric to be important and provides writing structure. Herrick refers to different scholars and professionals in literary studies to support his claims. I agree with Herrick’s claims and believe that rhetoric is important writing that gives us structure and discipline to organize our language effectively.

      Good first reading response. You provide a thoughtful reading of both texts and make some useful connections to your own experience. In future posts try to capture the authors' claims a little more precisely and draw on quotes to support your reading. I enjoyed reading this - nice work.

    2. eel like this holds truth because it is difficult for me to formulate what I want to say in my head, but when brainstorming “half-formed thoughts on the page,” it enables me to begin writing

      Good point and good connection to the text.

    3. Social media has been able to encourage society to write and share their thoughts on issues

      Yes, one of his key points.

    4. Although people are writing more, he also discusses how the quality of writing has decreased in some ways.

      I'm not sure he argues it has declined in quality (later when discussing Lunsford's work he suggests it has improved.) He merely concedes that a lot of it is bad, but it is better that more people are writing and so improving, if only a little, when in the past most people did not write at all.