Social media is the perfect example of multimodal, it is a large platform with multiple modes. Videos, Music, Pictures, Poems, Status updates and more you can find all modes there. That is probably why it is so widely used it connects people and helps us to understand and share information with each other. The use of images and caption is a powerful tool, it can used for politics, economics, poetry, art and more. Our whole concept of understanding is shaped around these different modes.

I cant help but wish this article was longer, I feel like my annotations are becoming repetitive. The fact that they are not requesting a apology from Greene is very surprising especially since he received a lot of negative feedback from it. The feedback he receives in the forms of words, facial expressions and online hate is very powerful. Not only do modes help you understand but they help you feel. The saying "sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me." comes to mind. Words can affect you mentally, lower your self esteem and hurt your feelings. Movies, songs and books can make you cry and feel emotions not belonging to you. Modes aren't just for understanding, they can also create empathy, heart break and love.

As I am thinking about this situation more I have come to really understand that all the modes are interconnected and together to give individuals a better grasp of the information. The reason Greene was looking at the speaker is because seeing gestural modes while hearing aural modes helped him better understand what was being said. Also, seeing the speakers expressions and gestures helped him understand quicker so that he could translate it more accurately(not that he did).

If Greene doesn't know sign language why did he agree to be the interpreter? Greene's father is obviously trying to protect his son. The real people to blame however is the County's Leaders, they should have organized for someone more qualified and organized to translate. To most americans he was just doing his job and the majority were focused on the commissioners and other speakers. Greene's job was very important because he was counted on for giving the whole community of hearing impaired in the county the proper information. His gesture and facial expression was their only force of information. Visual modes like caption would have been helpful in aiding the community with information.

Becky Bates-Williams defends the amateur interpreter claiming that he isn't to blame and that it is harder than it looks. Based on the video it is clear he is nervous and unsure of himself. Using gestural mode, observing his facial expressions and body movements we can assume this isn't something he is used to. Gestural mode helped apeal to her ethos and made her still up for hm. Knowing he is nervous helps us to understand his mistakes more and to pity him.

For some reasons the wording of this sentence caught my attention. It reminded of linguistic mode. According to Arola and Ball "When we think about the ways the linguistic mode is used to make or understand meaning we can consider: word choice, the delivery of spoken or written word..."(5) Charlene McCarthy used very discriptive words, words that paint an image in the readers mind. I thought this was a great example of linguistic mode.

The gestural mode is one key in individuals understanding each other. Based on a person's facial expressions and body language you may be able to figure out their mood, feelings and opinions. Simple gesture make a huge difference on the way individuals interpret words and actions. Your friend saying "your so annoying!" with a smile on their face means something completely different from your friend saying it with a frown. This article is a prime example of this whole concept in a more basic and obvious form. When the community see the speakers reaction alongside the interpreters signs they were confused and lost. There was no way for them to fully grasp how serious and dangerous the situation they were in was.

In my primary text, the authors explain multimodality as "how we combine multiple different ways of communicating in everyday life." According to Arola,Sheppard, and Ball these include visual, aural, linguistic, gestural and spatial. These are modes individuals experience daily, from conversations with friends to a chapter in a textbook. Modes are essential to our understanding of concepts, ideas and information. When originally reading the ball text I was reminded of being in elementary school, and seeing everyone develop their own learning styles. Some students were aural learners and need to hear the information in order to understand it, others were tactile and learned best from hands-on activities. Much like those kids every individual has modes they understand better than others. The deaf community relies heavily on visual cues and language, giving them a amateur interpreter is much like taking away they ability to understand the situation all together.

I find this citation quite interesting. The county leaders were preparing for a press conference in which they were planning to give "crucial" information to the public, and instead of getting an experienced and qualified interpreter they called a complete amateur. The lack of preparation and effort they put into finding an interpreter can lead one to believe the deaf community in Manatee county is merely an afterthought.

I will be using this text in partnership with Arola, Sheppard and Balls "What Are Multimodal Projects?" Through these annotations I hope to explore the similarities in both texts as well as asking questions that will help me dig deeper into both texts.

Was there any writing? Any markings? Differences in stitches? Add more details, even mentioning the lack of detail ( Ex: stating the panel has no visible markings...) to give the reader a fuller image.

Were there any additional objects (letters, pictures, notes,ETC) that came with the panel? Maybe there will be some clues as to what the dog or bracelet means.

From reading this I can tell you are really starting to question and investigate this panel as well as, Jimmy Popejoy.

I like that you started with the most attention grabbing thing to you. However, I think you should first introduce The AIDS Quilt. That way the reader will understand what it is.

Love the word choice, the description brings a vivid image to mind and flows smoothly.

The wording of this article makes it hard to follow in one go. I have had to reread this article several times. Each time I have read it I have understood a new part, quote or page. What do they mean about articulation? how would an object articulate an idea?

How can an object symbolize acceptance/rejection. What about the object would lead historians to conclude it is a symbol of acceptance or rejection? Maybe a flag or quote on an object would be a good indicator. Many objects we use to show acceptance or rejection are indirect, for example, sending flowers or flags of certain colors. Background information would help show this more than the object itself.

This answers my previous annotation where i was questioning how historians pick items. There is no guarantee the items they pick will have had a significant impacts or meaning to the society. Maybe like rubber bands or garbage cans for us today.

According to this when analyzing material objects the observer should not put opinion and thoughts in their descriptions. There analysis should be based purely on the physical object and background knowledge.

This text focuses on how scholars will categorize everyday objects in terms of material culture. My supplementary text focused on specific object and the new uses for it. It is a stretch to compare the two but they both deal with a form of material culture. This text is an explanation and my supplementary text is an example.

Material culture is any object, place or resource that can be used to define a specific culture during a period in history. Material culture can be as simple as certain fabrics and accessories to something as huge as a building or monument. For example, we can link silk to ancient china and the silk road.

There is sort of a contradiction in this quote. How would the explain remarks about a picture without trying to interpret the picture? From experience trying to describe an object i know this is not an easy task. Every person has a different perspective so isn't possible descriptions to be bias? paying more attention to certain fabrics, symbols, colors, etc. also each person has a different interpretation of descriptions so isn't it still possible for two people to picture different images?

How do historians really know which objects shows a culture? what about an object will show how significant it is to culture? I know the CRT is a symbol of the 1920's because I read the article about it. What about objects historians are now finding? Doesn't having background information kind of ruin historians perspective on the object in the sense, by knowing its use they might emphasize details linking the two.

During my first reading this quote really caught my attention. I found the idea of one object signifying more than another object interesting. Everyday objects as symbols? Laughable. My supplementary reading gave this quote a new meaning. The cathode ray tube was a huge technological advancement in the 1920's. CRT's became popular all over and was standard in most homes and workplaces. The electric shaver was also made during this time but the CRT was a bigger symbol of the shift into a more technology based society. Therefore some objects signify more than others.

Upon my first reading of this i had a very vague understanding of this text. i understood he was speaking on material culture, how it is used and applied. However I still struggled to really grasp all the information in this text. Thankfully I read a supplemental text, "A Terminal Condition: The Cathode Ray Tube's Strange Afterlife" by JOSH LEPAWSKY AND CHARLES MATHER. This text really helped me understand the content and vocabulary through a real life application in my supplemental reading.

"Every end is a new beginning." In 2009 New York Times announced the "death" of the CRT however according to this article from 2014 the CRT is still very much "alive". Pieces of the CRT are used for a variety of things and new strains of bacterium have even been found growing from the electronic waste dump. Death is defined as the permanent end of the life of a biological organism. Based on this definition the CRT is still very vital and important. however its importance has shifted from being in the spotlight to one that is very hidden and unknown to many. However it seems that there are some negative aspects to the continued use of CRT's including toxic chemicals, and potentially dangerous bacterium. If someone doesn't find safer substitutes for these chemical and better ways to use/host CRT's we could have a potentially hazardous situation on the horizon.

This notion of the CRT continuing to live on even after they are discarded reminds me of the Buddhist belief of reincarnation. Reincarnation is the belief that after death the soul will be brought back to earth in a new body/form. In this case we would use soul loosely to refer to the materials/ parts of these machines. The fact that materials from those machines are still in use today is pretty ironic considering new generations don't even know what they are, but still 'use' them. But as the quote goes "There is nothing new under the sun."

I find it funny that this author constantly refers to the elimination of CRT's in households/ workplaces as a death. In a way the CRT represented the era of technology integrating into everyday life, so for the CRT to go from a cultural fad to complete Obsolescence can symbolize the death of that era. But with every end comes a beginning and this technology helped pave the way for more modern technology including flat screen TV's, Laptops and Iphones. From that perspective one could say that it was necessary to clear the way for and aid in the transition to a more technology based society.

Being from New York and seeing first hand how Harlem looks today versus looking at in 1968 is amazing. And to see a historical and dangerous scene occurring there is very disheartening.

I understand they wanted attention, awareness and action for the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr, but this was very dangerous and extremely reckless.

Yikes. What was the intended effect of using that title? Was this targeting African American men? Was it successful?

It is so amazing that during a time of such racial discrimination, The Supremes were able to gain such international popularity.

Why is the Caucasian man not wearing a " I Am A Man" sign? Is it because society already views him as a man(human being)?

This might indicate that there will be several photos of protesters during this article.