750 Matching Annotations
  1. Oct 2018
    1. Another claim presented in Thompson’s chapter, states that before the internet, people were not writing frequently

      Need to do more to frame as a claim.

    2. Thompson claims that people who use different messaging platforms rarely make grammatical errors in their essays and in their schoolwork

      Not a major claim.This element is really part of a rebuttal (he opposes the idea that social media is making writing worse).

    3. persuade the reader to understand his argument.

      He doesn't persuade in order to get us to understand. He wants us to agree.

    4. ur new generation writes. Thompson argues that the internet has given us a platform to write like never before. No other generation has had the tools to write so freely and easily

      Need to capture his overall argument more accurately and fully.

    5. The time has come when writing out our ideas with pencil and paper is no longer popular.

      Bit of an overstatement. A lot of people still use pen and paper to write many things.

    1. Thompson made the decision to include this experiment because his audience would know the esteemed reputation that Vanderbilt has and be more inclined to trust these results.

      OK, but this is rather broad and doesn't tell us anything very interesting. Studies from reputable universities are commonly used. Try to explore in more detail the way a choice or an elements works to persuade the audience or has an effect on the audience.

    2. ant decrease in the quality of papers that students produce. Thompson’s use of rebuttals function to strengthen his claims and counter any opposing viewpoints that his readers may have. 

      Good work in this section. Keep working on this and improving the analysis. Consider the strategic and persuasive dimensions of T's rebuttals.

    3. son directly challenged his opposer’s view and used evidence to persuade his audience that the counterclaim is invali

      Good

    4. lic Wikipedia entries. She found that “when the students first tried inputting badly sourced articles, the Wikipedians simply deleted them. So the students were forced to go back, work harder, find better evidence, and write more persuasively,” (56). Thompson i

      Need to discuss audience effect claim in sep paragraph, line up examples and evidence, and examine in much more detail. This is his central claim, so you need to explore it much more fully.

    5. Social media has given rise to a phenomenon known as the audience effect

      OK, but you seem to have moved to another claim.

    6. s argument because it was spoken by a well-known poet, someone who’s very job is to write

      Good -can you push this insight further? What is it about poets that make them useful to use to illustrate this point?

    7. ck up his claims. 

      Need metadiscourse section

    8. g, and culture.

      Good overview, but could capture his overall argument a little more accurately and completely

    9. cognitive thought,

      seems a little circular

    10. become more of a personal passion t

      On right track - but only captures part of what T is getting at when talking of the great shift.

    11. One of Thompson’s main claims is that writing on the Internet allows people to improve their cognitive behavior by clearing their thoughts

      Make more precise?

  2. sarahsblog376309888.wordpress.com sarahsblog376309888.wordpress.com
    1. “Indeed, one of the unspoken cardinal rules of online expression is be more interesting” (Thompson, pg. 54).

      Try not to start paragraphs with stand alone quotations. This is what G and B call a 'hit and run" quotation."

    2. . This example is the reason teachers oftentimes make students annotate a piece of literature that they are assigned, even so knowing that the student dreads i

      Not sure I see the connection.

    3. With this said, Thompson claims that online writing tools help broaden our way of thinking and in general provide more thorough thoughts and ideas.

      Try to connect more directly to previous sentences and idea of writing as helping individuals with discovery, externalization of thought, and clarity.

    4. support his main argument concerning the pros of public speaking through online methods.

      Intro could do more to situate Thompson, perhaps by exploring the controversy. Also need to tighten up langauge and make more precise.

    5. literary

      Don't say "literary" (he isn't a novelist) but rather rhetorical or argumentative, or just persuasive srtategies.

    6. delving

      analyzing (use language of argument)

    7. humans formulate deeper clarity/in-depth thoughts, superior effort and improved writing skills

      make more precise - how is it letting superior effort?

  3. Mar 2018
    1. stillconflictabouthowusefultheseclassroomskillswillbeintheworkplace.

      like waw and post process, debate over transfer.

    2. Suchamovemightallowusto(1)connecttheclassroomwithwhatstudentsarealreadydoingintheirownlives;(2)accountforourcurrenteconomicandtechnologicalinfluences;and(3)diffusetheconflictbetweenacademicandworkplaceinterests,buildingbridgesbetweenthesetwointerestedparties

      excellent goals

    3. nwhatfollows,IargueforamovefromattentiontotheconceptofsituatedlearningtowardwhatIwouldcallnetworkedlearning,andIdelineatenetworkedlearningaccordingtofourdescriptors:horizontal,peripheral,nomadic,andindependent

      main claim

    4. Studentsarelearninginnetworkedwaysmuchmorethantheyarelearningfromtraditionalpedagogicalapproaches

      seems a very bold claim

    5. ehavemovedintoanera

      technology is magic

    6. Thisessayproposesthatinlightofwhathasbeencalledthe"neweconomy,"weneedtorethinksomeofthepedagogicalapproachesandtheoriesweusetoprofessionalizeourstudents.

      Main claim. Do we really need this based on such thin reasons?

    7. Takentogether,thesetwotopicsindicatealargerseismicshiftinthewaysthatindividualsworkandliveinthetwenty-firstcentury,ashiftthatisalsoreflectedinhowprofessionalwritingstudentsarelearninghowtobecomeprofessionalsinthefield

      The main claim. Seems based on thin data - two speciall issues.

  4. Oct 2017
    1. seems so silly, obviously no one wants mass shootings to happen, but this is where the demagoguery comes in. In today’s society, it seems as though each political party views the other as a group of terrible, evil people with bad ideas. Although I don’t know much about politics, I do read many twitter arguments and shake my head at how these parties go against each other so aggressively.

      OK, these are examples of weak arguments, but you need to show how they fit the definition of demagoguery.

    2. things. For example, Hitler was a demagogue who got away with killing so many people because he taught his followers that his way was the only one that mattered. One could even argue that Donald Trump is a demagogue in power now. His insensitive way of speaking about the opposite party is demagoguery. He places adjectives in front of everything, like “crooked” Hillary. This could be seen as a tactic to make her seem less credible just by being associated with that word.

      Good, but you need to unpack RM's main claims in more detail before going to analysis of a target text.

    1. critical digital literacy” in her writing. I think by this she means she believes young people should be able to understand computers and other digital medias we use daily.

      That is rather general - I believe her definition goes beyond this. Try to provide more precision and specificity when giving an account of claims.

    1. because each day we use our computers and our smartphones and most of us have no clue what goes into that.

      Interesting response to Boyd. Could capture her claims more fully and precisely.

    2. In my opinion, the most important claim is “teens will not become critical contributors to this ecosystem simply because they were born in an age when these technologies were pervasive.” Throughout the entire reading, Boyd is trying to explain that just because teens and young adults were born in the digital age does not mean they know anything about how a computer works. She explains that the youth must learn how to become media literate, it does not come naturally.

      This is indeed a key claim. Try to capture some of the other main claims when discussing texts.

    3. The most provocative point in the chapter was made by John Perry Barrow,

      OK, but frame in terms of he primary author - Boyd draws on the words of John Perry Barlow to argue...

    1. The very last line of Roberts-Miller’s “Rhetoric ad Demogoguery” text sums up everything I felt after reading 100+ comments: “What most prevents demagoguery is a culture in which we believe that you should ‘Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.’ And that’s what we should teach” (Roberts-Miller). In a marriage, politics, with family and friends, we could all take a cue from watching the hateful ways humans communicate with each other. It starts with us. The more aware we are, the less likely we are to support that kind of hate in others.

      You demonstrate a good understanding of RM's concepts and apply them to a very interesting set of examples. Nice work.

    2. Each side claims to be the “in-group” and the other as the “out-group”, which ends up isolating them both from each other, effectively creating a dynamic similar to that seen in our current political discourse.

      Yes, a fairly common, predictable pattern in internet comment sections.

    3. already see elements of demagoguery as defined by Roberts-Miller in “Characteristics of Demagoguery”. One of her key claims is that demagoguery takes on “god and devil terms.” Driscoll used these terms directly (“demons”), which “evoke strong emotions” (Roberts-Miller). It is clear to me, as someone who has fielded many questions about how I can teach yoga and believe in Jesus, that evangelicals are generally very scared of what they do not know. If it slightly wreaks of something “new age”, it is cast aside as bad. People engaged in yoga are flawed, misguided and need to be “saved.” Someone like Mr. Driscoll serves as a catalyst for more fear-mongering and anxiety. It gives folks in his congregation permission to call others evil without even considering that they may be quite normal and spiritual. He disapproves of any attempt at questions why, and lays down a blanket statement to refute any legitimacy that yoga may have. And people listen because somewhere inside of themselves, they are already harboring a judgment or fear that they may not have vocalized.

      Fascinating - what an interesting way of exploring demagogic discourse.

    4. Rather than it be solely dependent on the evil of one person, it is subtly built off of preexisting beliefs that pervade a group of people that are not in power.

      Yes, a key element of her argument.

    1. he McDonalds?” (31), to try and relate the personal freedom of smoking to the personal freedom of eating. If people can eat what they want and it hurts them, why can’t they smoke? But, this gets circular since his argument at the beginning essentially says that smoking isn’t so bad. If it’s not bad, perhaps he shouldn’t try to liken it to something else that’s bad. And, all people have to eat; not all people need to smoke to survive.

      Strong, thoughtful analysis and evaluation.I particularly appreciate the way you investigate Miller’s use of sources.

    2. n fact, I am quite sure he didn’t read the entire study because the quote he pulls is from the very last line of the conclusion, which is at the beginning of the lengthy text. He is working under the assumption that many people will think of the BMJ as a credible source, thus he is credible, but leaves out huge bits of information that can shift the meaning entirely.

      I think you nailed it. He distorts the research pretty badly.

    3. The symbol of a fascist regime

      It's worth noting that the author equates liberal politics with fascism. This is a rhetorical strategy (cf Jonah Goldberg's Liberal Fascism, which is a popular book that makes this case) that has gained a lot of traction in the last 10 years.

    4. We were faced with a teaching moment we weren’t prepared for, but should’ve been, where we had to explain why that was inappropriate. While these conversations are uncomfortable, they are necessary. Technology can be a great thing, and a terrible thing. We need to teach kids, at a younger age, what to look out for.

      Yes, this has to be a key element of digital literacy. It does seem to be one of the few things schools are starting to work on wrt digital literacy.

    5. teach youth how to navigate media and technology in the same way that we are learning about rhetoric and writing: through a more thoughtful, analytical lens. I see this as teaching youth to ask questions like:

      Yes, and I'd argue that rhetorical knowledge ought to be central to her project.

    1. mportant one, so, hopefully people will catch on, add to the rhetoric, and produce more knowledge to help bridge the digital divide.

      I enjoyed reading this discussion of Boyd. You capture her claims precisely, make excellent use of textual evidence and raise interesting critical questions.

    2. Teaching people how to be critical about their information sources, while useful, will not help anyone get a job

      Perhaps, but there are other reasons it could be important.

    3. She only mentions Wikipedia, and goes on for pages about its greatness.

      A number of other scholars do the same. My concern is they represent Wikipedia as a key paradigm for thinking about digital literacy. But I suspect it may be more unusual than they assume. Many have tried to replicate the wikipedia model (wikicourses, wikitextbooks, etc.) and have failed. Encyclopedia articles are small enough, the genre well understood, and they integrate nicely with wikis.

    4. I think Boyd’s ideas about giving more education opportunities for young people is great, but she doesn’t outline the specifics of what that looks like.

      Yes, also my complaint. Her account of critical digital literacy is interesting but also lacks detail.

    5. which we are unfamiliar with who wrote it, and also subject to whatever biases they bring into the writing of said book. We will never see or hear the process of how they chose to include, or exclude certain information.

      Nice job distilling three of Boyd's key claims.

    6. that the basic foundation that children and teens have with technology gives them more confidence as they begin using it.

      I think there is research supporting the idea that younger people are more likely to jump in and play around with technology in a way older people are not (could also be they have more time). This may just be a matter of emphasis. Boyd would agree young people are generally more comfortable and may use digital tech more, but she argues this is often consumption-oriented and does not necessarily support the kinds of literacy she believes are important.

    1. All in all, President Trump’s speech to the U.N. Assembly utilized many demagogic strategies that Miller identifies within her articles. It is concerning that our current President is using such extreme tactic in his rhetoric. I hope the ability within America to freely criticise through open discourse will prevent President Trump’s persuasion towards polarization. However, I have already noticed polarization caused by Trump’s rhetoric within the United States. Thus, it is a fear of mine that this speech will create polarization on a national level as well.

      You do a nice job discussing potential connections between this speech and RM's concepts. Some work, others seem a little strained (e.g. the North Korea examples). If you choose to develop this you may wish to look at other speeches by Trump - for example his speech accepting the nomination, and his inauguration day speech ("American carnage").

    2. Miller illustrates a few examples of strategies used within demagoguery that can cause such polarization. For instance, the use of god and devil terms causing slipperiness, the use of victimization, motivisism, apocalyptic metanarrative, and in-group/out-group rhetoric, are a few of these strategies that Miller argues demagogues use towards their goal of polarization.

      Nice distillation of RM's definition of the characteristics of demagoguery.

    3. he

      She

    1. redible media source should not have any of these simple mistakes, as media professionals understand that editing and presentation before publishing is vital to their credibility as a whole and audience respect.

      Promising evaluation of the two texts.You pose some useful critical questions. I think analysis of sources may have been derailed (not sure you found the original sources).

    2. FORCES International, who wrote this article, are a biased organization in favor of r

      I think this group may have re-published the piece. The original is published on the CATO site.

    3. In other words, although Miller’s rhetorical strategy can heighten the support of readers who agree with his values, it can also heighten the anger and motivation of the disagreeing audience as well

      Yes - this may even be his aim.

    1. Therefore, by helping each other create tools that enable understanding within the media, along with empowering each other to use the existing tools necessary for media literacy, we engage in active learning. As a result of this, the the development of “digital wisdom” is a relevant and useful solution.

      Thoughtful discussion that includes some strong analysis of Boyd.

    2. evaluate information independently” (Boyd, p. 181).  Otherwise, youth will continue to “look for new intermediaries” to help them determine what’s valuable amongst the internet, instead of being able to critically assess the credibility and quality of information they access themselves. (Boyd, p. 186).

      You capture two of B's key claims well - nice work.

    3. It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, Boyd discusses this assumption, illustrating how it is dangerous to our future as a society that lies ahead.

      Nice overview of Boyd's argument!

    1. It is very clear that infowars.com takes part in demagoguery. They use multiple tactics that Roberts Miller categorized.

      Thoughtful analysis. There is a lot of great material in this post. Some of it appears to need some revision and refinement.

    2. It was extremely hard not watch Alex Jones. I feel guilty for giving his website traffic and his video one more view.  

      I sympathize!

    3. Alex Jones demonizes the left throughout his video. He claims that the left is hurting families. The value of the family is a core american idea. Hurting the family appeals to (if not all) most americans. Jones is drawing on an assumption he believes most people will identify with. Families = American. America = good. Therefore anyone hurting the family is bad and is hurting america.

      Fascinating. Try to include the specifics of textual evidence to illustrate and support your analysis.

    4. Throughout both articles she makes statements that allow the reader to understand that sometime YOU are in fact the bad guy. In the case of demagoguery your point of view takes a strong hold on who gets to carry the label.

      Indeed, this was one of the big take-aways for me also.

    1. One problem with Miller’s arguments is that he does not cite all of his sources. He uses these extreme facts to try to persuade people but he does not use correct citations which does not allow you to check and see the information for yourself. There are only two articles that are referenced with the title and the source of the article. Both of these articles come from the same place the Cato Institute. The author of the article “Lies, Damned Lies..” works for the Cato Institute. He is a professor for lawyers. Because of that it makes his argument less reliable to me. I know that lawyers are able to be very persuasive and are able to use data to point in the direction that they desire. Not just that but he also uses the same kind of strong language as Miller does. For Miller to be more persuasive he would have to find more data and cite it correctly. It would be helpful for him to find articles and data that are from medical sources.

      This post contains interesting insights and shows potential. But it also seems as if it is still taking shape and could do with revision. Discussion of Boyd is brief. You show good evaluative instincts when examining Miler and Shieh. Try to include close textual analysis of their arguments.

    1. This can be seen in contrast to the first version of the story. The first version is the story in a written text. This version includes information on the characters, their home and the kind of work they do. The story is composed of paragraphs, in a traditional written style. These two versions show the contrast in oral and written communities.

      This post provides an interesting, thoughtful and rather general discussion of concepts in Ong. But it does not analyze the specifics of the Sundiata text. Try to include close textual analysis in future homework.

    2. Without the use of written language we are not able to hold these complex ideas into our working memory.  

      Yes, this insight is central to both Ong's argument and Young and Sullivan's.

    3. . Just as in academic writing, professional writing and narrative writing have a set of rules, so do oral cultures.

      Interesting comparison.

    1. rhetor gets what he (usually) wants, then he might abandon the rhetoric” (pg. 6). This is exactly what Donald Trump did during the campaigning for president making ambitious promises to the public in order to secure the election only for him to do a complete 180 and started to drastically change the infrastructure that has kept this country in stability.

      This is interesting and shows some promise. You need to examine the specifics of the language in the target text (Trump) and relate it back to RM's concepts. This could perhaps make an intriguing project. .

    2. What the author meant is that demagogic rhetoric has caused not just writers and scholars but politicians as well to establish a mentality that debates, issues, policies and so on are being settled through questions of identity instead of rational reasoning.

      Yes, this is a central element of RM's position

  5. ottocolomsblog.wordpress.com ottocolomsblog.wordpress.com
    1. some these techniques in Sunadita’s second version of “ Two versions of an Oral Tale”. Starting in the 3rd stanza, we see the rhythmic repetition of verses like “King of Nyani, King of Nyani”, and “Will you Rise” that extends in the next stanza. By telling the story of the King of Nyani through the use of repetitions in a rhythmic poem, the power of the words is not only able to project visual images that paints the poem into a story but also it allows those hearing the poem to remember the story, which is then orally passed down generation to generation.

      Nice post. You provide a thoughtful overview of some of Ong's main claims. You also start to apply Ong's concepts to the Sundiata text in a very interesting way. It does seem that your analysis gets started and then is over - I would like to have seen you explore more of both texts as your work on repetition shows much promise. This is what I would like to you focus on in future homework assignments - fuller exploration of arguments and more detailed textual analysis.

    1. 2. In Miller’s argument, I find multiple strengths and weaknesses. I found that a strength of Miller’s argument, as well as a rhetorical strategy, is his use of statistics. Miller first cites the British Medical Journal in ordr to state that it is even safer for college students to smoke than drive. Additionally, Miller utilizes rhetorical questions to prove his argument. I believe that this is a strength as well. When it comes to Shieh’s op ed, I found multiple strengths and weaknesses. One strength is the fact that Shieh utilizes personal experience to prove his arugment which I believe establishes his credibility. Shieh also utilizes the data of the concentration of nictotine to prove the counter argument wrong that the reason smoking is banned at SDSU is due to secondhand smoke outdoors.  However, I do feel that Shieh should have utilized more statistics for his argument.

      Promising, but I would like to have read much more on the specifics of what you found strong and weak in these texts.

    2. The digital literacy skills that I believe are important for the youth to develop include communication skills, creative skills, and collaborative skills. As a millennial, I witness my peers post on social media quite frequently. Unfortunately, though, I feel that some of my peers are lacking communication skills to effectively prove their points. It could be a misspelled tweet, an Instagram caption full of emojis and no words, or a post on Facebook that just is not coherent. In this day and age where social media is so prevalent, I feel that the youth needs to care more about making sure that they are effectively proving their points while utilizing correct spelling and grammar. Additionally, creativity is obviously needed in order to create posts that stand out due to originality. I also feel that millennials need to be able to effectively collaborate with one another to share ideas.

      Thanks for adding your perspective on ways that B's notion of critical digital literacy could be developed.

    1. Boyd also offers solutions to this issue of unequal digital literacy among youth, which I personally think is a noteworthy issue. When Boyd states, “By not doing work…to help youth develop digital competence, educators reproduce digital inequality…as privileged youth have more opportunities,” (180) I completely agreed with her. It is not right to assume that all teens are digitally literate, as opportunity varies among demographics. The solution that Boyd offers is that educators should take on a role of helping youth navigate the digital world as well as “focus more on skills and knowledge necessary to make sense of the mediated world,” (180). It is entirely true that in this day and age it is completely necessary to become comfortable with technology in order to succeed in higher education and the career force, so educators should work on bridging the gap throughout the youth and avoid assuming that all young people are completely digitally literate.

      Another strong post - you capture Boyd's central claims well and engage in some thoughtful analysis. Well done.

    1. n this link, one can see the before and after of some users reactions to finding out the shooter was a white man. In an effort to alleviate their cognitive dissonance they spread the idea of the shooting is a false flag. I really expect nothing less from this site at this point. I have been in enough chat rooms at this point that my opinion of people on the internet is not high. However, this level of racism and exclusion is soul-crushing compared to what I was taught this country to be growing up. The world is not as sunshine and rainbows as parents would want it to be.

      Very interesting. Try to delve more into the specifics of the language and relate it back to RM. This would make a really intriguing project. Let's talk.

    2. Donald was quick to blame Muslims before the shooter was even identified.

      Wow.

    3. The moderators, however, doubled down on their love of trump and expressed that he was in absolute control over the cabinet with his expert communication skills. Combine the moderation team with The Donald’s love for quasi-journalistic sites like Breitbart and you have a recipe for quick spreading propaganda

      Fascinating stuff. But try to find specific textual examples that fit RM's definitions.

    4. he

      She

    5. I find it fascinating that despite all our access to information and higher education, Miller’s answer to stopping demagoguery came down to the golden rule. Ancient social movements have been saying it for millennia but the more I study the more I see how true it is. Treat people with the respect that you would want to be treated back to you. Obviously, every situation has its o

      I had the same reaction.

    1. In perfect world, however,

      Yes - although in an imperfect world we could still do more.

    2. One way in which students can be groomed for an online world would be mandatory Rhetoric, journalism, or philosophy classes in order to build a healthy skepticism and critical thinking skills. Unfortunately, this kind of growth would require massive amounts of funding and resources.

      Agree on both counts.

    1. ws and ultimately shapes the way we see the world. Now with companies like Google profiting off of this information and incentivizing us to pick sites and information, we agree with we are stuck in our own bubbles. Alien to entire other ways of thinking on the internet. The internet has the power to unite us all. Begin the foundation for a global culture as people from all walks of life share their ideas and opinions. Unfortunately, that doesn’t seem all that profitable and by sectioning off the internet into different isolated groups more companies can mine and sell off more and more of our data. Keeping people distracted and divided instead of one big collective conscious. Boyd seems like a smart woman who can help the world a ton by showing it what it is

      Interesting discussion of Boyd. But capture more of the author's key claims before moving to response, and try to do a little more precisely.

    2. he establishes this claims by first explaining a common phrase known as digital literacy.

      It's more a common definition of set of assumptions about digital literacy that she sets out to tackle.

    1. “norm”as harmful, she reinforcesthat a life centered around conservative living will only benefit those who participate. @apurposefulwife is not alone in her endeavor; a growing number of alt-right accounts have mushroomed across social media platforms, beseechingthat the right “unite”to counter the “threats”levied with them. As Millers advises, the best way to negotiate with demagogueryis not to get caught up in sentiment about the rhetor, but to counter rhetoricwith metacognition and deliberation

      Excellent analysis. If you have the stomach for it something like this could make an interesting project.

    2. nreasonable hate for the ideologiesshe helps further.“White’s breeding”is a watered down term for the more radical actions members of the alt right call for; anti-miscegenation, the propagation ofracial purityand the dominance of a white race.

      Another powerful and disturbing example.

    3. n this way, we see @apurposefulwifeplace herselfin the role of avictim, another characteristicof demagogueryMillers identifies.

      This is a nice example of victimization. I always find this the strangest element of demagoguery (and various forms of racial supremicism).

    4. to this in group, those who disagree cast into the outgroup

      OK - but need to give evidence of this

    5. some have called, “militant atheism” and manipulating an ideology to suit hisviews, paying little heed to others.

      Interesting section. Could explain RM in more detail, particularly her ideas about the key characteristics of demagoguery.

    6. Of allRobert-Millersstatements, her assertion that we must move beyond the demagogy’s we disagree with to recognize thepresence of demagogueryor demagogues within our own communities or ideologies

      Yes, one of her most important points

  6. hafsabadsha.wordpress.com hafsabadsha.wordpress.com
    1. While Miller presents research extensively, his use of logos is an attempt to establish his credibility, ethos. However, his abrasive language could leave his audience divided in terms of the pathos invoked. Passionate advocates of smoking would perhaps find this piece resonates deeply with their own sensibilities,

      Indeed. It may even be that Miller was practicing an early form of political trolling that he has developed in his position at the White House.

    2. d throughout the chapter. A causal, informal engagement with the digital world must not be the end to which teenagers strive to, rather a complex understanding of information-processes on the Internet must be understood.

      Nice work. I would like to hear your thoughts on how to operationalize Boyd's notion of critical digital literacy.

    3. We continue to exist in an era where the digital world shapes a significant number of our conversations; it has taught us to interact on a different dimension and brought about a new culture of communication. To associate fluency with age will deter progress rather than encourage it; a progress that will only achieved once we work on effectively bringing down barriers to access and encourage more proactive learning.

      Smart, well-written analysis of Boyd's main arguments. Good work.

    4. Boyd’s use of case studies helps illustrate this argument clearly; teens with restricted access to the Internet curate a limited skillset in contrast to peers with sufficiently more access. While the social aspect of the Internet can be affected, Boyd points out that access to information is greatly hampered. While interviewing a young girl from New York, Boyd discovered that her only means to access digital information was through an inconsistent mobile connection, or to rely on her friends who used “real computers” (194

      This is an eloquent account of Boyd's claim about digital inequalities.

    1. beral and Democrats argued how Republicans defended themselves over the scandal while their candidate was told to be sent behind bars. Both are polarizing characters along with their polarizing crowds. The demagogues are the ones who see only the right within their group and the wrong outside from out-groups. Using this news article, I found Trump’s side to be the demagogues in the situatio

      These seem like good examples of problems in the way political arguments often proceed. They have a family resemblance to demagoguery, and so are related to this, but I'm not sure they fit RM's definition exactly. Remember, for her, it must make debate dangerous and thus threaten to close down democratic deliberation.

    2. Different conservative media platforms, mainly Fox News, have been defending the two main account users, Ivanka Trump and Jared Kushner. To say that the Republicans and conservative media are not hypocrites is absurd.

      Very interesting example. I think this is a good example of hypocrisy, and as you say this entails double standards. I believe you might have to do more to make it fit RM's definition of demagoguery. it is one symptom, bit I think more (in a single text) is needed to fit the bill.

    1. Miller’s article is filled with false hope for smokers and illogical nonsense for non-smokers.

      Nice critique of these texts. There is also some eloquent writing in this response. I think you are a little hard on Shieh who tries to find common ground with his audience.

    2. age 85 or above” (p.1). I found a lot of different websites that contradicted this search stating that sixty percent of smoking deaths occur at age 75 and up. These numbers come fro

      Good - you could cite some.

    3. ecurity. Kids in particular who live in a home where they have access to a computer will most likely use the Internet. They are not aware of all the imminent danger online. Adults should help navigate kids and teens when finding a legitimate, safe website. “Digital natives” and “digital immigrants” should learn to hone these skills together.

      Eloquently expressed.

    1. of the digital world, we’ll quickly find ourselves in a predicament of lost translation. Adults are aware of this digital danger, yet they only pay the most attention to how much time kids are spending on the Internet. If we can work together to resolve these issues, we can educate both the youth and adults about the digital age.

      Solid discussion of Boyd with some thoughtful observations. Remember to introduce quotations and capture claims precisely.

    2. When pertaining to the “rhetoric of digital natives,” Boyd claims that “not only is it fraught, but it obscures the uneven distribution of technological skills and media literacy across the youth population, presenting an inaccurate portrait of young people as uniformly prepared for the digital era and ignoring the assumed level of privilege required to be ‘native’ “(179). Us teens and young adults do not have a wide knowledge of anything and everything digital. If the digital immigrants assume this about us then there can be consequences, online harassment, and other obstacles.

      OK - but first explain Boyd's critique of digital natives.

    3. “misinformed sources.” Boyd explains Wikipedia as being a community of shared ideas, discussions, and thoughts amongst a written debate. You are able to read all of the distinguished viewpoints of people from America as well as other countries in order to create and develop conversations.  Questions can be asked and problems can be solved.

      Good observations. Try to also capture what Boyd says WIkipedia has to teach us about digital literacy.

    4. source. “Wikip

      Sorry to bug you about quotations - but introduce them (;-)

    5. Sometimes I can be a bit naïve when it comes to researching information online. When I was younger, I used to believe everything that I found online because no one explained to me how to research the proper websites.

      Thoughtful, interesting introduction.I like the connections you make to your own experience. Remember to introduce all quotations.

    1. Career wise, I aspire to work for ESPN and entertainment platforms.

      Many thanks for sharing this!

    1. exaggerated the threat of crime in the New York City suburbs, lamenting how Long Island’s parks have become ‘bloodstained killing fields’.” Trump even polarizes gang members by suggesting that police officers us an “us against them” mentality. If gang members are equal to animals, the police officers may believe they are above gang members and in turn treat them as so, potentially leading to higher violence and police shootings.

      Promising - the analysis starts to get interesting but finishes too early. Remember homework assignments should be more developed and the analysis more detailed than reading responses.

      Also, when discussing a target text try to analyze that text rather than a secondary reading. You can use a a secondary reading to support your interpretation.

    1. – “It obscures the uneven distribution of technological skills and media literacy across the youth population, presenting an inaccurate portrait of young people as uniformly prepared for the digital era” (179). – “It assumes [the] level of privilege required to be ‘native’ ” (180).

      These are two of her main claims regarding negative impact of the definition.

    2. paragraph then finally say her main claim. I would say the main overarching claim is that learning about technology takes time and effort, no matter who you are. Some quotes I found include…

      Good, but try to distill the main claims rather than list quotes.

    3. “Comfort with technology is often a prerequisite for obtaining even the most basic of jobs” (198). This is something I have found to be very true within my major and classes. Professors do not teach us about the current technologies and programs that are popular, but rather how to teach yourself how to use each program and solve the problem of not knowing how to use the program through giving us projects to teach ourselves.

      Good observation. This has been my experience also.

    4. Myspace for a couple more years than me. When I started on Facebook you could just go to a website to pick a background, log in and they would load the code for you. However, I know the basics because even a simple smiley face had to have a certain code you had to know.

      Yes, it was a similar trip down memory lane for me.

    1. Based on Ong’s perspective of oral communication, I believe that this form of communication plays a different but comparably important role in our society compared to written communication. For one, the majority of the population back in the days were illiterate and being able to read was either a luxury or a part of life in church. This made the story readily available to a large population. Second, that whoever listened to this epic could have their own ideas and interpretation based on the previous storyteller’s voice, something written stories lack. Ong’s text proves that a single story could have many versions with different ideas and interpretation. These are the characteristics that helps keep Sundiata’s epic alive to this day.

      You provide an interesting, thoughtful general discussion of issues raised by Ong. But the homework asked you to apply Ong's concepts to the Sundiata text and show where they apply. For example, Ong suggests oral texts contain a lot of repetition, formulas/sayings, paratactic language, language that is close to the human lifeworld, etc. You could point to examples of these from the Sundiata text and discuss how they fit Ong's framework.

    1. I was interested in the facts that rhetorics nowadays is more often used as a tool to convince of even control what people think. And this claim is certainly true with politics where certain politicians would use a specific term to gain points with a certain audience. Take for example Obama or Trump during their campaign speeches, both used different rhetorics to fit the audience’s appeal. There is thus pros and cons to having an audience. One could simply adjust his or her writing based on who the audience is only to make ends means.

      This contains interesting material, some good writing, and some connections to your experiences that were illuminating. But this could do more to answer the homework questions, and focus more on the details of the text. These are things to consider in future responses and homework.

    1. Another example on Cloyd Rivers’ account includes much of the ideas listed above such as polarization and in-group and out-groups. Cloyd Rivers’ also takes a stance on the recent protests in the NFL and brought up by Colin Kaepernick. The far right and Cloyd believe that the people kneeling are disrespecting not just the flag but the people that fought in America’s military as well. This is a very popular opinion throughout America but it is not a polar subject. There are not only two sides to the argument presenting itself. Much of Cloyd’s time is spent praising the people who say that they will always be standing for the anthem. Another thing that he does is scapegoat the out-group, this is one of Roberts-Miller’s main characteristics of a demagogue. The scapegoating of Kaepernick is evident throughout his twitter profile. Since Kaepernick was the leader of the inequality movement in the NFL

      Good general discussion of how RM's concepts can be applied to a specific text. I like the work you do on polarization. The political cartoon is an interesting text to examine. Your work on athletes starts to take shape but needs to be connected to RM's concepts and to include textual examples.

    2. It is defined as popularizing propaganda that motivates an in-group to hate the scapegoated.

      Nice - good account of RM's definition of demagoguery.

    1. Boyd also argues that the rhetoric of digital natives has some problems. These teens are not all digitally literate and are learning these technology on their own as they grow up. She feels as if they are being exposed if because they are not able to “critically examine what they are consuming.” I think the solution that Boyd presents matches the problem that she explains. Being more knowledgeable about digital literacy would make our youth and nation as a whole more knowledgeable about what they are reading constantly online and with technology. 

      Interesting, thoughtful discussion of Boyd. You capture some of her main claims and talk about some connections to your own experience. In responses work a little more on capturing claims precisely, and try to supply some quotations or textual evidence to support and illustrate your points.

    2. digital literacies that are evident in a worldwide webpage. Through exploring the literacies about “America’s civil war” from people around the world and the other side.

      Good - could say a bit more about why B thinks wikipedia is a useful resource.

  7. tylerchalmers.wordpress.com tylerchalmers.wordpress.com
    1. dditionally how people would function without these resources before we had them and how stories would be told with no textual information.

      Solid homework assignment. You clearly have a good sense of Ong's argument and give a nice account of his key claims. You note the relevance of Ong to the Sundiata text, but I would have liked to see some textual evidence presented and discussed. So in future homework assignments focus on that, and on slightly more "polished" analysis.

      This was fun to read and shows you are reading texts carefully and thoughtfully.

  8. madisondotpadilla.wordpress.com madisondotpadilla.wordpress.com
    1. of a demagogue. I think that by framing someone around that and listing their rhetorical strategies. I think Miller’s argument shows that there are two sides to how we label someone for their speech or seeming persuasive.

      Starts to sound interesting but need to develop a more sustained analysis of the target text. This means taking concepts from RM (polarization, demonization, motivism, fallacies, etc.) and showing examples in the

    2. In Robert Miller’s article Demagoguery (Denver Talk) Miller outlines the problems with the definition of demagoguery such as, “ the way it emphasizes the identity and motives of the rhetor, and that emphasis comes from what I think is a methodological error. Scholars begin by compiling a list of prominent and powerful individual they consider dangerous. They then look to that set of individuals to see what they have in common in order to define what is wrong with that rhetoric”(1). He then goes on to list specifically the “six problems to consider with the methodological problems with the infer rhetors I hate”. His main argument is that, “I think we can distinguish demagoguery from other forms of persuasive discourse on the basis of the presence of certain rhetorical moves, not the identity of the rhetors. I think, also, we should talk about the effectiveness of demagoguery in terms of how it plays into the information worlds that people inhabit. Demagoguery isn’t an identity. It’s a relationship”(2).

      Nice overview of Roberts-Miller's main claims.

    1. n Miller’s article, “The Smoker’s Plea”, Miller implies the correct way to look at both sides of an argument. He suggests, “Miller criticizes the implications that follow from his opponents position.

      Seem to mix up Miler and the text on assumptions? (I wrote that).

    2. of the argument and implies through his critique on the argument that he does not agree with the smoking ban, but takes the argument from two different angles.

      OK, but this seems very general and does not really evaluate the two target texts.

    3. The assumptions such as, “Understanding what holds an argument together, Identify the writer’s primary audience,

      I think of these less as assumptions and more as rhetorical knowledge and critical thinking skills. (Maybe check use of assumptions?)

    4. I agree with Boyd, because I feel like now days unless you’re going to school and constantly learning your way around technology that you’re not going to learn how to be a critical thinker. Young people today need to not believe everything they see, learn about both sides of an argument, and learn how to navigate the digital age

      Good points on critical literacy and life long learning.

    1. Boyd’s argument in this article because he makes the claims that the younger generation is not as knowledgible as they may seem. The younger generation is set in what they know how to use and often do not know what the interworkings of social media and the internet are. This is why I agree with Boyd and his claims in this article.

      Solid, thoughtful, interesting discussion of Boyd's text. Try to make the account of claims a little more precise.

    2. This forces the younger generation to limit their knowledge of social media to what they know.

      On the right track, but not quite what Boyd argues.

    3. Boyd argues in her article that teens may be active on social networking sites but it doesn’t mean they are knowledgeable about how the internet works.

      Good - this captures some of her overall argument, but there is more that could be added (e.g. the problem with mainstream definitions of digital literacy, esp. the idea digital natives/immigrants))

    4. Boyd’s article, It’s Complicated the social lives of networked teens,

      That's the name of the book. The chapter is called "Literacy: Are Today's Youth Digital Natives?"

    1. Just as the information is received, there is a point of process engaged by recipients contributing to an overall narrative. Given the diversity of narratives surrounding media, Roberts-Miller gives specific deconstruction in her literary discussion Characteristics of Demagoguery.Roberts-Miller defines demagoguery by classifying an in-group and out-group. The in-group being the majority population and the out-group being the minority population. Members of these groups are included but not limited to classifications of religions, political identity, ethnic or cultural background, as well as, likes and preferences. The problem with in-groups and out-group functionality is when it becomes illegal to challenge the hegemonic values imposed by an in-group or the dictator of the hierarchy.  The continuum of demagoguery is attributed to the who continually back the mainstream claims, defending against the notion of accusations, -imposing a general acceptance as things are the way they were meant to be. In not rocking the boat, so to speak, propagation is furthered. The solution to this is in the activism in the area of media source transparency. The general public ought to critique credibilty of claims imposed in order for the general public to make (a) decision(s)/judgement(s) which are contingent upon quality of information given through media. 

      This is interesting, but it seems you only start to unpack Roberts-Millers' main claims/concepts, and have not applied them to a target text.

    1. With Palczewski teachings I am able to apply categorizes to deconstructing rhetoric as: symbols, symbolic action (expressive human actions), identification, agency, social reality, and reality understood (Palczewski:16). Conversely, Palczewski names and discusses constraints acknowledging we do not share the same experiences and therefore, are limited with shared interpretations of experiences.

      Nice overview of Palczewski et al's work. You are ahead of the game (we will return to this text soon).

    2. Humanity has a history of progression in terms of the matter, for instance the creation story, where in the Garden of Eden, God gave Adam the task of naming the animals, or how Egyptian cuneiform was intended for business yet contributed to the formation of a universal written communication form. The Gutenberg press also receives much credit for the progression of shared communications, and of course the internet has globalized humans.

      This is a rich, eloquent discussion rhetoric and writing studies. I enjoyed reading it!

    1. Giving account to a teen’s quality and quantity to technological access must also be considered around this rhetoric. As it is not safe to generalize, in this matter, we must. Socio-economics play a role in the quality and quantity teens have access to. In turn, the quality and quantity of access play a direct role in the amount of information and activity a teen participates in online. There is still much debate around funding of the educational system, this is mind, comes the implementation of programs and regulation. Much discussion has recently emerged around teens and technology as access causing for progressive dialogues and possible solutions continue to surface.

      Solid account of Boyd;'s text. It could do more to capture some of her other key claims.

    2. Boyd recommended teens not disqualify Wikipedia completely as often times professors and scholars are uploading the data. Furthermore, the history pages reflect scholarly debates on facts allowing teens to collaborate data and conclude upon a decision.

      Good discussion of Boyd's argument about Wikipedia and Google. Clear, accurate and articulate.

    3. An important point Boyd brings up for discussion is, we cannot assume teens can be critical of content (Boyd: 177). On the flip side, we cannot assume parents, teachers and educators are equipped to inform teens to be critical of content as technology has only recently emerged. To ponder if a critical lens matters when comparing the interactions of digital “immigrant,” “native” and question the matter, -is to see we don’t know, what we don’t know. For this reason, the discussion is timely. The reshaping of society has been attributed to recent technological growth. The emergence of unexpected impacts upon society, such as how teenagers gauge appropriate use with such a tool. 

      This gets at elements of Boyd's main claim, but could capture it more precisely.

    4. The literacy chapter goes through arguments and claims about teens and digital literacy which come across as intended, -to provoke thought.  

      Nice introduction!

    1. As we continue looking at Gage’s video, remember that RM wrote “demagogues typically appeal to popular images (often visual) This appeal reinforces those images, even when they have nothing to do with reality.” I was struck while viewing the video by the number of memes Gage used. Memes are popular images that balance between funny and true, for whatever your humor or “truth” is. See below for a gallery of the memes found in Gage’s video. All are pejorative towards liberals.

      This is a model analysis of how demagoguery plays out in a target text (with great images and examples). It is also entertaining and instructive. With your permission I'd like to share this with other students in my classes.

    2. “entitlement, double-standard, rejection of the notion of reciprocally binding rules or principles,” the presenter’s “heavy reliance on fallacious arguments,” and his propensity for “pandering to popular prejudice and stereotype” in the video

      A nice i alarming collection of key characteristics

    3. Call me a peace-loving hippy, but I am staunchly opposed to anything that derives its power or followers from hate.

      I will call you a reasonable person who cares about democratic norms.

    1. sn’t this a great image

      It is indeed a great image

    2. But to be a powerful citizen doesn’t demand being able to code or not; it demands being literate, being able to understand the implications of a technology

      I like the way you keep raiding interesting, knotty questions!

      I suspect she might agree. Perhaps this comes back to the question of production and participation. Do we need to teach students technical skills (not necessarily complex ones) that enable them to produce (with code or without) and participate in the ways she suggests? Some literacy theorists argue that certain kinds of high level literacy require that one have knowledge of production as well as reception.

    3. The issue here is not that the biases are present, as much as the biases being present and enacted without the receiver of the search results made aware of the biases.

      Yes, an important distinction.

    4. d how source accuracy is understood in public education by comparing the views on Wikipedia and Google.

      Nice overview of her argument.

    5. f I’m being perfectly honest, I found that Boyd made some accurate claims, but nothing that was unexpected in a reading about digital literacy. In fact, I predicted from the first page of the reading what her arguments were going to be, including analyzing the use of the phrase native/immigrant from an anthropological point of view, and discussing access

      This is likely because a) you are a smart person who is familiar with these issues, b) Boyd's ideas both draw from others quite a bit, and have become well known.

    1. Weaknesses: I didn’t really find any weaknesses in Shieh’s argument, only in his presentation of evidence. I couldn’t discern which CA EPA study he used as evidence, so I went to the CA EPA website. There, I found nothing but negative reports of tobacco smoke and second-hand smoke. Rhetorical strategies Syncrisis – comparison of diverse or contradictory things – SDSU and Chinese village

      Hey, for a "beginner" you have produced some great rhetorical analysis (close reading skills translate nicely, so I think you have already been doing such analysis under a different name).

    2. Titled a “Plea” but is really a tirade. I was expecting one type of method of persuasion, and was bombarded by another.

      Indeed - a tirade that perhaps anticipates the age of rage we find ourselves in (Miller is a major force in the current administration).

    3. the interface, and teaching people that biases and humanity is literally coded into everything on the internet, is far more important that teaching people to code.

      Great point. Boyd is now part of a research group that does work of this sort - so I think your suggestion is relevant.

    4. So, when boyd kind of ignores this necessity in this chapter, I’m frustrated. The need to be critical is not new or tied to the ‘net, it’s been long required.

      I suspect she would agree. She does talk about media literacy. This may be a question of emphasis.

    1. The writers come across as bitter, angry, and rude both argue for the benefit of smokers ignoring the rest of society and attacking the school systems for wishing to limit the exposure to smoking.

      You seem to conflate the two articles. But Miller and Shieh take different positions and argue in quite different ways. A deeper engagement with the textual details of their argument is needed - try to include in future posts.

    2. bility to smoke at any time they desire with no consideration of where they wish to smoke.

      I'm not sure the Shieh piece does this.

    3. ol for propaganda and manipulation, those exposed to the internet must approach it with skepticism.

      OK, but try to include quotes and textual evidence to flesh out your analysis.

    1. etation is what we all need

      This post does good work. You identify some of Boyd's central claims and provide a thoughtful discussion of them. Work on giving our reader the "big picture" argument and tightening your account of claims a little. Enjoyed reading this.

    2. e speaks of the responsibility of educators, parents, and policymakers to educate all in the navigation of an “information rich environment” she speaks of essential knowledge of rhetorical writing; knowing, identifying, and interpreting rhetorical writing will allow you to better understand the goal of an argument.

      Yes - good point. I strongly believe rhetorical knowledge ought to be a key component of digital literacy.

    3. Google gives unreliable results and it’s the user’s responsibility to realize this and filter the information.

      Not quite what she says - it's more we don't know how the algorithms work and the whole process is not transparent, the way it is with wikipedia.

    4. Danah Boyd author of “Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?” examines the disparity between youths who have access to technology and those who don’t. Boyd goes on to asset that today’s youths lack digital knowledge and skills, youths lack essential understanding of fundamental flaws of technology. She begins her analysis by stating that technology is not universal, many lack the opportunity and access to digital devices, resources, and knowledge. She points out that untrustworthy information litter the internet; untrustworthy information meant to sway or mislead users and youths lack the knowledge to distinguish the difference between trustworthy and misleading news.

      Solid intro, but don't forget to mention her central claim - that the definitions many have used to talk about digital literacy are inaccurate and harmful.

    1. In all i think that just from looking at one comment on a website, that she was right in that there are certain characteristics that pop up to notify you if a rhetor is using demagoguery based rhetoric. Things like the “us” vs “you” mentality, playing the victim, demonizing/ dehumanizing of the out-group, heavy reliance on fallacious arguments, and pandering to popular prejudice and stereotype all help identify demagoguery based rhetoric and almost all of these popped up in the comment we took a look at. Miller hit the nail on the head in her assessment of the characteristics of demagoguery.

      Fascinating stuff. You have located some great target material and you correctly identify the relevant characteristic of demagoguery. This has a ton of raw potential. But it does seem to need revision to clarify and tighten up the analysis.

    2. infestaion” that costed them the war, instead of actually taking blame for getting into a shitty war.

      A lot of potential in this analysis. You understand RM well. But this seems to need revision - more precise expression and more precise account of the concepts you will apply.

    3. pro-slavery didn’t

      watch for missing words

    4. Characteristics of Demagoguery,” and ” Rhetoric and Demagoguery” both written by Patricia Roberts-Miller explore the idea that demagogic rhetoric has certain key characteristics that distinguish themselves from other forms of persuasive rhetoric.

      Nicely put.

    1. After searching ,on different search engines, the sources Miller uses in his article seem to be non existed which makes me believe everything he said was just talk to try to persuade you his how while adding fake sources and studies to make his arguments seem legit.

      I'm also skeptical, but I think part of the problem is locating these sources, and that is rather complicated.

    2. on data driven argument when i felt his data was not really reliable to begin with

      I think you are right to be suspicious.

    1. Boyd claims the “rhetoric of digital natives” has been damaging for one because it “obscures the uneven distribution of technological skills and media literacy across the youth population, presenting an inaccurate portrait of young people as uniformly prepared for the digital era and ignoring the assumed level of privilege required to be “Native”

      Excellent. This is clearly one of Boyd's key claims. You capture it nicely.

    2. le have little training in being critical of the content they consume.” This quote from Boyd proves that she feels our  do not have the proper skills we need to be successful in this new age driven by technology. B

      Yes, a you say an important issue these days.

    1. l the people of this great sovereign State and nation, both white and black” (7). While African-Americans are considered evil, Wallace’s words make it seem like he is trying to save them from pure evil, and giving them the opportunities he believes they deserve

      Strong analysis - nice job.

    2. Almost all the claims made by Patricia Roberts-Miller in “Characteristics of Demagoguery” were very intriguing to the mind. It makes you think of the tactics that famous figures utilized to become so successful in their agenda. How exactly did Hitler create an army that subjugated and killed Jews, and get away with it for so long? How do particular religions gather followers and create such deep commitment for their beliefs? How can Donald Trump, as radical as his words and speeches are, become elected as the leader of the United States?

      This introduction does a nice job getting the reader's attention and making the issues come alive.

    3. It would be difficult to have professors and adults guide them while the youth attempt to independently navigate the digital world.

      Good point. But the alternative is, one supposes, to figure this out alone.

    4. actually does a “fundamental disservice”. I compare this to parents who fear their child getting hurt by the outside world and therefore shelter them from the harmful bacteria or roughness. While they have good intentions, these parents are keeping children to being exposed to the outside world and building their immune systems. Likewis

      Intetesting analogy.

    5. This also relates to the claim that assuming all youth are digital natives “obscures the uneven distribution of technological skills and media literacy across the youth population, presenting an inaccurate portrait of young people as uniformly prepared for the digital era and ignoring the assumed level of privilege required to be native” (179-180).

      Nice - this is one of B's central claims. You capture it well.

    1. I occasionally dreamed about being Internet famous, whether it’d be through a blog, Facebook, or Instagram. So who knows? Maybe writing on here without having to awkwardly saying it face-to-face could help us connect! I hope we all learn a bit more about each other through the semester and have a great time.

      Thanks for sharing Giselle. There is still time to be internet famous. Perhaps this could be the topic of your final paper.

    1. The video creates polarization from creating two standpoints, you either agree with Donald Trump or you disagree with his opinion.

      This looks promising but seems brief, and the analysis only starts to get traction. Is the rest somewhere else?

  9. hillarysarabiarws411.wordpress.com hillarysarabiarws411.wordpress.com
    1. Miller and Shieh argue smoking should be allowed on campus. Miller’s argument is based on comparative health benefit such as poor diet and exercise. Shieh’s argument emphasizes on students handling stress at school.  I think Shei creates a stronger argument with pathos and pulling on the readers emotions to sympathize different ways to relieve stress. The weaknesses in Miller’s argument is comparing health risk with poor eating. The argument that smoking is healthier than too little exercise and poor eating choices is a weak argument. Miller does not really explain these different health issues and how they impact your body now and to the future. Miller also has a weakness in sources, which are not so reliable and outdated.

      This is a little brief and the analysis thin, But I see you have also done good work on Palzewski and Landrieu. That is not yet due but looks promising.

    1. the internet is very useful. In today’s extensive use of social media being one of the main outlets where we receive news, being able to analyze the biases and credibility of the information is important. This is especially crucial with the uprising of fake news. People need to analyse the outlet they receive news. I think Boyd could have created a stronger argument by mentioning fake news and see why critical re

      Good points. You are right that fake news really adds an urgency to the issues B describes. When her text was written fake news was not really on anyone's radar.

    2. nalyzing the assumptions that digital natives is a label for all youth. She goes on in the chapter that assuming all youth is part of this digital culture is wrong though the support of digital inequalities. She dedicates a section about digital inequalities and that not all you have the same access to technology, but also do not have the same opportunity to become fluent in the digital age. The label digital natives also takes away the idea that adults and the older generation cannot be efficient with today’s technological advances. The solution she offers to this problem is that

      Promising, but needs a clearer, more precise account of the claims you describe.

    3. Boyd has several claims in this chapter. I think her main argument is that it is dangerous to assume all youth are automatically informed in digital literacy and that older generations cannot interact or offer anything to the new digital age. She claims the both generations, young and old, have to become more digitally literate and have to consume knowledge from social media and internet information with a critical lense. She argues that everyone should analyse the content they are consuming.

      Great overview of key claims

    4. people have a critical eye when reading information. Another interesting point Boyd makes in the chapter are the inequalities in accessibility with technology, but also acquiring skills in using the internet and social media. I think the chapter is interesting how Boyd brings up provocative claims made by others that all youth are digital natives and create a divide between generations.

      Nice intro, overview and discussion of connections to your own experience.

    5. interpurates

      Not sure I follow

    1. or example, as Sundiata’s mother sings her lines, we see repetition of her words that convey a sense of desperation and urgency in her embarrassment. In the first text, we visually see her frustration written out, but not to the degree of the second text, when it can be assumed how hysterical and upset she was at their situation.

      Good - I like the way you show that features like repetition can be part of both the dynamics of oral composition and also part of artistic effects.

    1. Thank you for reading this little blurb about me! I look forward to working with everyone this semester.

      Wonderful - thanks for sharing!

    1. In the end the person who made the comment on the holocaust found himself/herself in a never ending “discussion” against users who all they had in their minds, while leaving their replies, was “really?” or “are you stupid?” It is also an example of what Miller explained about demagogues, and how some of the characteristics he mentioned can be seen every day. Even outside social media.

      You show a good grasp of Roberts-Millers' concepts. The online debate you mention is really interesting but seems to provide only limited "traction" for applying RM's categories. That is, while it is interesting, it may not be the easiest text to apply most of these concepts to.

    2. he author also adds that those who follow this belief tend to focus more on obeying and promoting on those symbols, whereas those who follow patriotism are more concerned about having effective policies, social security, a healthy economy and others (Miller). Learning about this made me think of today and how you often see those two kinds of people around.

      Yes, this also struck me as an important distinction.

    1. iller does use a lot of studies to persuade the reader to believe what he says. I find the British Medical Journal interesting because of how its search engine works. Miller’s writing is from 2007, and if you write “smoking” in search you probably won’t be able to find where Miller got his information from. However, you will see that the latest article that has been uploaded in BMJ is very recent. This means that this source is constantly upgrading its data. There are probably newer articles of recent studies that could be utilized to enhance or maybe go against what Miller writes in his paper. Miller also uses an article, “Lies, Damned Lies, and 400,000 Smoking Related Deaths,” to support another claim. If I am not mistaken, the article is from 1998, which for Miller was just 9 years ago before he wrote his paper. Although the article does what an article is supposed to do, it makes me thoughtful of whether it should or should not be considered relevant since it’s too old now. Clearly there are newer articles with stronger points and more credible studies covering the topic of smoking. Share this:

      You advance the discussion of Boyd fairly well.

      Good discussion of Miller and Shieh, the strategies they use. The discussion of sources shows promise. You pose many important questions. I think there is more that could be said about these sources, but this shows good evaluative instincts.

    1. The suggestion Boyd makes of equipping young people with critical digital literacy skills is definitely something to consider. It is something that they must learn from a young age to know; to have the skill to ask questions about the construction and dissemination of particular media artifacts (181). This would give them the chance to ask questions, wonder about something that appeals to their interests.

      Nice work - I see you capturing the author's claims more precisely and developing a more detailed analysis.

    2. btained by social media (186). Hence we all get different results even if we are trying to find the same thing. These along with what she said about Wikipedia are the ones that kept my gears thinking as I was reading.

      Good, smart overview of Boyd's argument.

    3. It’s Complicated: The Social Lives of Networked Teens, I feel compelled to say that the section where she discusses Google and Wikipedia was really unexpected. In high school I would hear teachers say many times, too many times “If they see you using Wikipedia in college, they’ll laugh at you.” Perhaps not with the mock tone, but what they were trying to convey through those words was still the same. Reading Boyd pretty much opened my eyes and illuminated me with a better sense of what Google is and how it differs from Wikipedia. The studies Boyd mentions are really interesting and also relatable. I really like how she was able to change my perspective on Wikipedia, now I understand that Wikipedia is a work in progress that changes over time as new knowledge and material is introduced (Boyd, 191).

      Great introduction - I enjoyed reading this. Your response (re Wikipedia and Google) is one many have shared.

    1. Indeed, Roberts-Miller lays out the features of demagoguery in her Denver talk, “Rhetoric and Demagoguery” and article, “Characteristics of Demagoguery,” paying more attention to the inaccuracies of how it has historically been defined in the first. Specific features of demagoguery Roberts-Miller identifies and discusses can be found in Taste of Country’s YouTube video, “Megan Linsey Kneels After Anthem: Who’s With Her?”

      Nice work. You lay out RM's main claims and key concepts and successfully apply them to your target text. I was impressed with how precisely you capture RM's argument and how well you find examples in the Linsey video comments.

    2. One of the main claims Roberts-Miller asserts in her Denver talk is that people traditionally have failed to deliberate about and settle upon improved policy in times of great dissention, such as when slavery existed (3-5). Instead, people have separated and reduced themselves into two distinct camps: an “ingroup” which they are a part of and an “outgroup” which represents the opposing (and inferior) view (3-5). Instead of debating what should be done about the situation at hand, these groups of people engage in a verbal and/or written fight about their group superiority, and this is the type of rhetoric that demagoguery incorporates (5).

      This is a wonderful distillation of RM's central claim.

    1. Overall, both Miller and Shieh make frequent use of logos and pathos in their respective articles. However, often the appeals to logic are incomplete or the conclusions derived from them lack logic themselves. Also, the word choice the authors make to appeal to the reader’s emotions actually work to erode their arguments in some instances.

      I really enjoyed reading this. Your analysis and evaluation of both texts is intelligent, thoughtful, and thorough. Impressive.

    2. the way Miller presents this statistic is questionable, as it sounds like a generalization that lacks specific crucial details.

      My own reading of the original source supports your hunch.

    3. She does not mention specifically what she means by this idea of youth constructing their own spaces, but she does allude to the importance and usefulness of having a basic understanding of code to build a website in her anecdote about MySpace’s early days (182). Though I think trying to get all youth to learn some code and build a site via that code might be too idealistic and impractical, I agree with Boyd’s overall idea that youth need to gain more understanding of what goes on behind the scenes of technological systems so they will gain greater power over them

      The same thought occurred to me. Research on "PLNs" or personal learning networks addresses much of what Boyd talks of. I was surprised she did not mention this.I agree the MySpace example is interesting but does not exactly provide a blueprint for the kind of instruction we need.

    4. Especially when individuals are young, but throughout their lives, they need to safeguard their information and not share too much of their identity with the world, so that they are not put in harm’s way.

      Adults too, as the recent Equifax disaster suggests.

    1. Indeed, in her chapter “Are Today’s Youth Digital Natives?” Boyd makes some claims that people should really pay heed to, such as the claim that algorithms that power search engines contain biases, Wikipedia is valuable for gaining an understanding of how knowledge is established, and labels can have different implications than people intend. Her overarching argument in this text is that the term “digital natives” masks the lack of in-depth digital knowledge teens actually possess, but her solutions for helping teens gain the digital prudence and skills they need are not thorough enough and are thus not helpful.

      Another model post. This is smart, thorough and detailed, and it is always grounded in careful textual analysis. This was a pleasure to read.

    2. Are the sources listed? and Does the site end in edu? which help point to more credible sites), though overall, I believe this criteria could have been more thoroughly expanded and focused on in my education.

      That is good to hear. This could mean things are changing, and Boyd's concerns are being addressed, she overstates the problem, or your education has been more sophisticated than most.

    3. will note the parts of Boyd’s text I found most intriguing and note what I feel are her most important claims. I will also list some problems Boyd associates with the rhetoric of “digital natives” and assess her solutions, evaluate her suggestions for helping youth become digitally literate, and discuss whether she leaves out anything important.

      Nice statement of purpose/metadiscourse.

    1. (“Sundiata: Two Versions” 449). This phrase incorporates repetition of the short “i” sound in “Tis” and “thickener,” repetition of the “th” sound in “the” and “thickener,” and repetition of the “gr” in “grown” and “grave

      Yes, although because it is in translation it's hard to know how much these aspects of the language can be analyzed in such terms.

    2. Sundiata is additive, aggregative, repetitive, and overall rather formulaic. Such features ultimately help carve out a rhythm within the story. This rhythm imprints the story into the griot’s memory and allows him to continuously repeat it over time and pass it on to members of the culture and other storytellers.  

      [My previous comments seem to be missing. Here are some new ones] Homework assignment one is excellent. Demonstrates good understanding of Ong’s key concepts, and outstanding application to the Sundiata text. Your work on aggregative and additive language, parallelism, redundancy, formulas and repetition is outstanding. I am particularly impressed by the quality of close textual analysis – detailed, sophisticated, developed. Nice work!

    1. This shows that this source is not credible because it is basically just a marketplace for opinions. I thought this was funny because just looking up one statistic can completely irradiate the reliability of this op-ed. If I looked up quotes and saw “.org” or “.edu” I would believe his statements much more because these are credible sources. This is just another example of how “Fake News” is actually everywhere and that people don’t always research what they are posting when posting it publically.

      Interesting. This is a good look elements of the source quality.

    2. I think overall the strength of Millers’ op-ed is that he is very passionate and uses language to build up and rile up the reader. He uses “facts” all throughout the essay to encourage his point, as any persuasive writer would do. However, I think he lacks the basic knowledge that smoking is in fact bad for you. He instead highlights that smoking isn’t “as bad” for you as other things like low-exercise and a bad diet. I think had he gone for a more compromise approach his argument would have been more effective.

      I agree with all of this. Your analytical instincts are good. Just try to add more on the specifics of what makes a claim source or piece of evidence weak/strong.

    3. think teaching people the importance of “fake news” and spreading it is an essential item we should focus on. I can’t count how many times I log onto Facebook and see someone share a link that is false. Whether its spreading misinformation about someone or something,

      Perhaps a potential research topic?

    4. was adding music and creating pop—ups on my page, which is crazy to think about now. These days no kids are really learning about anything on technology besides social media.

      Interesting - your experience seems to echo Boyd's claims.

    1. To me, the most critical claim that was made was, “teens will not become critical contributors to this ecosystem simply because they were born in an age when these technologies were pervasive,”. In order for teens to have a high media literacy they need to learn the ways. Nobody is born just knowing things, and media and online literacy is included in this. I agree with Boyd when she makes suggestions about making digital literacy skills more attainable. In our day and age it is very important that we stay up to date with technology as the future generations are the ones that will continue to grow and expand.

      Good - this is indeed one of Boyd's key claims and one of the most important.

    2. When I was growing up all throughout middle school and high school we were told to never trust “Wikipedia” and such. I find it comedic though that it was said to trust google always. Google is just simply a search engine, and you can find false information all throughout it.

      Yes, a lot of people have this reaction to Boyd's text. I like the connections you make between Boyd and your own experiences and observations.

  10. haileyjorgenson.wordpress.com haileyjorgenson.wordpress.com
    1. Alike Ong, I think both versions communicate their point in understanding and intellectual manners. I believe for myself personally, that Johnsons version would be more beneficial for myself because I find it easier to comprehend and recall the information in that sort of format. I also think that I can relate better to this type of writing because I am use to writing how I speak. Therefore I am able to understand others better when its written in more of a vocal climate than the other. Neither culture is considered better than one another, just more or less a different way of learning and communication

      Again, I enjoyed reading this post. There is some insight and useful observations about Ong and SUndiata. But the response is general, and tends to bounce quickly to your own comments. I suggest in future posts you try to focus on the assignment questions, capture authors' claims more precisely, and discuss quotes from the texts.

    1. One of the most interesting parts of the text that I found was the comparison of Rhetoric and Community. Its not a common thought of mine that rhetoric builds communities and that a lack there of can be devastating to a community. I think this is very applicable in the world right now, where everyone is throwing there opinions on the internet and instead of having an intellectual debate using rhetoric, people are choosing to make a division. This division is caused by rhetoric of each other and the lack of understanding and willingness to try and see the other side. I found this concept very interesting and applicable in our lives currently.

      There is a lot of good insight in this post. You make some useful observations about Thompson and Herrick. But the response is very general, and tends to bounce off the texts pretty quickly into your own comments. I suggest in future posts you try to focus on the response questions and the key claims advanced by each author, and you ground both in textual evidence.