PWR2: e-rhetoric

My Final Blog

2005-02-22T13:03:00.000-08:00

Blogging in academics is a very odd topic. I suppose because I have gone 19 years without it, I see no real reason for it. I still see it primarily as a diary for exhibitionists, but I do understand its other uses. As a form of journalism, people like to be heard. It is quite unfair that only a select few carry the title of "journalist," but I am not keen on everyone being a journalist either. I like to read something knowing that someone else thought it was worth reading. This someone else of course is someone I trust because the other things they deemed readable, I too found readable. I do not trust most things that have not been screened, especially when they are meant to be an authority. Now the cynics are screaming that people are getting published who are fabricating things, but that is the exception to the rule. Is not everything biased? There is no absolute truth. But there are too many bored and odd people on the internet for me to trust every Tom, Dick, and Harry on-line who decides he wants to be a journalist. As for a legitamate piece of writing, I think that this whole set-up reaks of unstructured writing. There is not even a spell check. Call me old fashion, but the only serious academic work for me involves a typewriter. Blogging in E-Rhetoric is a great idea. What better way to understand than to do? As for the entire PWR-curriculum.... I am not sure. Maybe if used to check on the ideas a student has flowing for his research project. My understanding of blogging has increased by 100% as a knew nothing of a blog before this class, and I can now see it as more than just an on-line diary (even if I still think it is the primary use).
Goodbye Blog.

Presentations 1 1/2

2005-02-18T11:36:00.000-08:00

The presentations were so much better this time around. Not that there was anything wrong with them the last time, but everyone seemed so much more structured and much more comfortable. EASE was the biggest and best improvement for everyone.
As far as being memorable, I am remembering a presentation that I thought was seemless. His use of technology was that of a master as he used one screen to highlight his most important points in print, and the other to show the physical manifestation of his points.
I see another where a guy started with something that had nothing to do his research project but engaged the audience with a laugh.

Wikis

2005-02-16T09:27:00.000-08:00

Another term I have never heard of.
"Wide Open Spaces" was a great introductory reading to understand wikism. I started with "Weblogs, Wikis, and Comments" but it was not engaging at all. Lamb did a great job of exploring the multiple facets and examples of wikis. Wikis by his definition are a community effort that works because the need to create will be greater than the need to destroy. The most interesting part was the beginning as he spoke of the creator of the World Wide Web seeing his vision of interactivity being demoted to the ability to click, creating an "over glorified TV." In my opinion, I do not see myself wiking for definitions, but it seems extremely useful in a corporate setting. Putting together a meeting schedule that everyone can comment on and edit if necessary works when something is meant to be corporative. As one of the teachers in the articles discovered, it does not work when someone wants to maintain control. How can there not be someone in charge? Society has led us to believe without someone separated from the masses to control, there is chaos (a.k.a. anarchy). There have also been complaints about an inability to navigate wikis, as there is so much from everyone. And what about someone coming in and altering what you have worked so hard on creating? One article said the ability to view the editing history is like watching authors fight over editing a book.
Some wikis have created hierarchies and are now not considered real wikis. Maybe the need to create is greater than the need to destroy. For now, the wikis that are around are surviving. Maybe the destructive ones have not found out about them yet.

Presentation 2.2

2005-02-04T11:21:00.000-08:00

I still don't know what to do. Braelen suggested I use the white board. Maybe I will. Maybe I will.

Presentation 2

2005-02-04T11:12:00.000-08:00

For my next presentation, I am honestly torn. I don’t know if I can upstage my last presentation in terms of the “element of surprise.” I also think it would be a cop out to use some sort of technology now that I made a stand against it. I want to repeat what I did last time, but I would like to make it more interactive. The content will now include new research as well as a more solidified “end goal.” I am more anxious about the second one than I was about the first, but I will have to work through it with my new knowledge.

Multilinearity

2005-01-30T21:32:00.000-08:00

"With hypertext, the actual text gets constructed as the reader selects which relationship(s) to explore as she chooses hyperlinks and reads the chunks of text in the nodes she selects. As a result, the meaning the reader makes of the hypertext depends in part on which nodes she visits, and in what order."-Michael Cripps
For someone who had no idea that hypertext was something, much less something to write theories about, Cripps' "Hypertext Theory and WebDev in the Composition Classroom" was very interesting to me. One interesting section deals with the idea of multilinearity in hypertext. The specific structure of print pages calls for linearity. Paragragh by paragraph, the text is read until completion (or until the reader gives up). On rare occassions (I've only encountered in movies), people will read the last page first, and then start at the begin. Other than that there is no freedom- not the type of freedom Cripps is discussing anyway.
Cripps in the quote above is claiming that the meaning of the text is altered by each reader as there is no predescribed route through the hypertext. It makes perfect sense. What I choose to read and not read will impact how I interpret the whole of what is before me. The idea of the text being "constructed as the reader selects which relationship(s) to explore" solidifies the argument that hypertext and print text are two separate genres that must be treated as such. If I, the reader, decide that node three is best followed by node eight, so be it. The author loses the creative license to steer me in hypertext. If I were an author, I do not know how I would feel about that. What if the reader decides not to read nodes two and twelve, and I believe them to be essential to my text?
Multilinearity.
I did not even know it was a word.

PowerPoint...

2005-01-24T09:34:00.000-08:00

The two articles I read were very interesting. Both a bit out there, but good to have read. Byrne and Tufte made PowerPoint look like a god or a devil, respectively, by going too far. I have never used PowerPoint for a presentation, but I have also never seen someone whose entire presentation was only powerpoint. When you simplify anything, you lose some of the content, but I think that slides presentations are useful for highlighting the most important points and drawing the attention of your audience. Tufte talks about the “good old days of bullet points,” but aren’t they the same thing? Bullets are just less effective at grabbing and holding attention. Tufte also believes everything is a market pitch in powerpoint and it should not be used in academia, but what if that is the objective of your class? And isn't everything today a market pitch? Why like my proposal more than someone else's? Why even listen to me? You cannot condemn PowerPoint as it is only feeding off of today's society full of ADD and "not enough time." Powerpoint is the "foot in the door" in my opinion, meant to strike a cord for future, more descriptive information. I also though, do not agree with Byrne who could have been speaking about a cure for cancer in his praise of the invention of powerpoint. He addressed his apprehension at first, but then he began to praise powerpoint on an artistic level that I did not quite comprehend. What I did get out of the reading was that there is no way that putting some images on the Dan Rather's profile can be that incredible.

Research Ideas

2005-01-09T21:51:00.000-08:00

I must admit that I do not like the idea of having to know what my final project will be by the end of this week. I have given it some thought and I have narrowed my choices down to three (I know the entry guideline says two, but I don't know
if I will even be able to find enough recorded data to write a paper on my choices).
My first idea has to do with online communities and how it is affecting our society socially. The link I have added is an interesting article concerning creating an online community of your own. The first line of text says "the internet exists to improve communication."
http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/a/network/2002/10/21/community.html
My second idea examines how people interact with computers and voice technology. Our brains react to stimuli differently, and I would like to determine some correlations between our reactions to computers and to humans. This is the link to one of my former Professor's lectures that sparked my interest in the subject.
http://siepr.stanford.edu/programs/SST_Seminars/Chapter_11.pdf
Lastly, the idea that I am most interested in exploring involves virtual reality and what we perceive to be real. In my
Comm I class last quarter, my teacher brought up a case that involved virtual child pornography and whether or not it could be considered illegal as it is not real.
http://www.law.duke.edu/journals/dltr/articles/2002dltr0019.html
I would like to look deeper into what it would mean if people could "get around" laws by creating something that is computer generated to take the place of the real thing. With every technological advance, it is becoming evident that preexisting laws are becoming inadequate.

Jan 7th Entry

2005-01-07T01:07:00.000-08:00

I have never heard of a blog before Wednesday's class. I have heard of live online journals, but not blogs. I don't have preconceived notions about people who keep blogs as I just learned what they are, but I don't see the purpose of a blog. Posting writings daily or weekly or whatever about yourself on the internet doesn't appeal to me.
This blog was very easy to set up. I have created a webpage before (for another class) and this was easier. This is probably another reason why people do it. I figure, why not write in a journal, but I guess no one else sees that. It is also like being published, which might make people feel important. I think a lot of people feel they have a lot to say and that no one is listening. This way, maybe someone somewhere will read what it is they have to say.
It would make sense to use a blog if, for example, you were traveling and could not contact people often, just so they can know that you are well and what you have been up to. It is a good way to "speak" to more than one person at a time, but I don't see myself on the computer reading someone else's blog. I feel like I could spend my time more usefully. I guess any form of communicating with others electronically can be considered e-rhetoric, so a blog falls under the category of the class.
No matter where it is you are writing, you must be aware of your audience. Your style is contingent on the chosen medium, and a blog is the same as anything else.