Paying attention to the qualifications of the author(s)/composer(s) is another crucial role in crap detection at it will help discern whether or not to take the piece seriously or to use it for further research.

In the Rheinghold text , he explains the importance of pay attention the website layout as well as content. However, in doing so, you must tune your crap detection and remember that not everything with a fancy layout is reliable, and vice versa.

Rather than simply stating information, the author (Berger) explains his source and the way in which he broke his research down into smaller categories. This citation is also apart of crap detection with a reliable source.

The implementing of this specific link gives important attribution and increases source reliability. The text makes a statement and is able to back it up with an external, secure source.

Though Rheinghold stresses the importance of crap detection and researching your sources, he accepts the fact that there a limits that we reach in terms of discernment of validity. This is shown as the ISIS busters reach ethical and practical limits of search. It is important in the way that one mustn't get overwhelmed with finding the true source origin because you can only go so far.

Rheinghold stresses the importance of looking at the base of things, rather than simply the makeup and what you see initially, it is important to dig deeper and look at sources from a questionable yet structured angle.

The article ends in 'edu' which, as Rheinghold states, increases estimation of its credibility.

Considering that the origin of this post comes from a non-secure site, that appears a tad amateur - also brings forth speculation. It is a blog site, and considering this - I somehow take what is posted 'with a grain of salt'.

I begin critiquing this article based on Rheinghold's initial conversation with his daughter. In the text Rheinghold suggests using a free internet service - Whois , in order to search for validity in research. After plugging this domain name into the site, I find that the name of the registered owner is 'Educase'. Educase is a nonprofit core data service for research and analysis.

I will be connecting this text through Howard Rheinghold's "Crap Detection 101" from chapter 2 of his book Net Smart - How to Thrive Online. This allows for further critic of this article in terms of this theme.

The use of this final quote, concludes the article and gives a direct quote for reference and reality. Another linguistic aspect of modality.

The dates and titles of the sub-headers give a time reference, allowing readers to see the progression of the dancers and their mission.

As the importance of visual modes is important, this extends to what is being photographed. Seeing the dancers in this element makes them more relatable.

The hyperlinking of this portion of the text, is an important aspect in multi modality. It gives reader the opportunity to further research whatever the topic may be. In this case, readers can see more about the Westside Cultural Arts Center. And as a plus, this link opens in a new tab - and readers do not stray too far from the article.

The Balls text discusses that through the use of various modes is important, sometimes the best way to explain something is through words. In this the author explains the popularity of Terminus, and as you read further the impact that the group has.

The photograph (left) of the dancers is the first one in the text, aside from the video that is in the beginning. This image "puts a face to a name" . For readers that did not watch the video, it gives a more positive receival of the dancers.

The chunking of the text makes it easier to read, which aids in the comprehension of the text as well as its aesthetics. This setup of the text is apart of the linguistic mode , presented in the Ball text.

The words the the author uses to describe the gathering of the Atlanta dancers are formal and inviting. This linguistic mode has a lot to do with the way in which readers receive what is being presented to them. For example, describing the Thursday evening as "sultry" , as well as the brief bu thorough description of the air, gives imagery and sets somewhat of a serene/relaxed mood.

The article initially grabs the attention of the reader by displaying a video. Rather than bombarding the reader with words, the article allows for an introduction through visuals as well as first hand recounts from the individuals. This depicts the visual and aural aspects of the Ball reading. Through this, the reader is able to get a more personal view of what the article is about, which is typically easier to pay attention to than reading a lengthy article that discusses the same things. The readers listen to the voices of the dancers, which brings forth a more of a connection through tone of voice and emotion.

I will be linking this text in reference to Kristin Arola and Cheryl Ball's "What are Multimodal Projects?" from their book Writer/Designer, which allows for further understanding of the purpose of this article.

This description makes me feel as if I'm looking at the panel. Love it

My first impression of this description was that it was nicely put together and detailed. I think this is a great start, however there should be more modes as well as additional aspects of the person's quilt.

Great connections between your experience as an artist and what you've observed from the quilt. I enjoy the objectivity rather than simply taking the panel for what it is.

The individuality of the panels is nicely described and understood. From the previous description, there is distinct differences yet similarity in the pieces.

This first description of the panel gives a brief but detailed imagery. Very good

Great pictures - but could be more multi modal as a whole

As a student, I am looking at this reading through the lens of a supplemental reading - bringing further connections. This secondary reading being "What Is A Machete, Anyway?" by John Cline. There are various connection between this reading and Prownian Analysis.The machete article goes about the use to the machete is various contexts and how it is seen. The Haltman reading greatly draws relation.

Allowing imagination to play a role is okay. In learning how to analyze, its easy to get stuck in seeing the object alone, and paying attention to details. But, imagination allows for description as well as deduction.

This is important as feelings obviously play a role in description. In relation to the machete, based on the individual - feelings and interpretations vary. For my research, this will be important in taking a step back to see how and why the object may make me feel a certain way.

When analyzing an object, its important to take time to see everything. Given, the longer one looks, the more one is able to see details. However, is it ever possible to over-analyze something? Is it possible for one to see too much, making the description overbearing?

One might ask, how is it possible to separate descriptions alone, from personal ideas and views? While this is valid, a rich vocabulary can avoid many conceptions.

When looking at material culture, interpretation largely depends on description vocabulary. The way one may see an object may change completely change as the description of the object change. In this, the nouns, adjectives, etc play a big role in interpretation. Instead of describing the machete as "A big, sharp knife, used as a weapon or for other work", one can describe it as "A fairly large blade tool with multiple uses."

When one is describing an object, it is important to do so in its entirety. Although it may be hard to separate prior feeling or belief, this is one the most crucial parts of analysis. So, in the case of the machete you would look at the object in itself - not the 'machete' aspect. Use more of a technical vocabulary, pay attention to details, but also keep an eye on the big picture.

The object metaphor given to the machete is that of fear/danger. In this, the aura that it carries is one of fear. As Prown suggests, the most persistent object metaphors based on belief are embedded in such feelings. Many are afraid of this object, therefore the belief is consistent.

The vocabulary in description is most important. While the use of active verbs are clear in bias.

The way in which we describe things have a big role in the interpretation of the object. For instance, using words of weaponry to describe the machete would bring forth a negative outlook. But describing it as it is used as a toll would likely bring or forth more of an open look at the object.

The way in which people often feel about objects, typically depend on, of course, experience. So rather than seeing an object for itself, there is often a blur between how the object has bee seen to have been handled. A prime example from the article, "What Is a Machete, Anyway?" is the obvious denounce of the object, that is often used as a tool.

Perhaps with the history of the use of the machete as a means of fighting back - it is easily looked down upon. For some people, like myself, a machete is not initially looked at as a form of weaponry. It is first seen as a tool. Much like one's first thought of a shovel is for digging for work or farm, whereas one of the last thoughts may be of death or harm,

I'm Guyanese and at home we call it a cutlass.

It it quite interesting that politics feel the need to be in control of anything violent. This would be a helpful tactic if we didn't have problems with the misuse of dispensed weapons in the hands of government agents. As we've seen time and time again, those who are of higher power than the average citizen seem to abuse such powers as if ''training'' was unnecessary. Are the hands of the state to be trusted? Should there even be access to weaponry at all, by anyone? Who is the state to denote that "tools are fine for workers" when they're not properly handling the power they hold?

The paragraph states that the machete is a tool - not much different than a shovel, that can be operated as weapon. As a result, Wilson should have had it concealed and/or held a license. Does this rule also apply to tools such as wrenches, a paintbrushes, pliers? Being that such tools can also be applied violently. These question is posed, not to dispute the possible dangers of the machete, but to urge specificity in terms of such problems. Perhaps certain tools (including the machete) should be pointed out when debating the right to carry weapons.

This really wasn't that long ago. Wow.

Funny to me how men with guns are brought in to bring peace.

This photo evokes a strong sense of emotion, almost as if I was there.

I would assume that men dressing in women's clothing was quite looked down upon during at this time. (kind of as it is now). The photograph of the woman wearing the diamond necklace looks like something I'd see in a magazine today.

It seems that not many people where there to witness her ice skating. Perhaps not many interested, or maybe people were busy given the turmoil of the time.

I've seen this picture before, but never knew the specific history behind it. I find it interesting that someone was able to capture such a brutal moment.

This retrospective can be compared today, where many are still fighting for equality - even though civil rights is not as blatant of a problem as it once was.